US Judge Dismisses Fraud Charges Against Gautam Adani
WASHINGTON, DC -A US judge has dismissed criminal fraud charges against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani and two other executives after the US Justice Department abandoned its prosecution.
US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis on August 10 dismissed with prejudice securities fraud, wire fraud conspiracy and securities fraud conspiracy charges against Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani and Vneet Jaain. The charges cannot be filed again.
The three executives were accused of misleading US and international investors about an alleged scheme to pay Indian officials approximately $265 million in bribes for solar energy contracts. They have denied wrongdoing.
Garaufis accepted the Justice Department’s narrow argument that the corporate statements cited in the indictment could be considered vague assurances or “inactionable puffery” rather than material misrepresentations.
The judge, however, rejected the department’s broader criticism of the prosecution.
The SEC had accused the Adanis in 2024 of misleading US investors about anti bribery practices linked to renewable energy projects in India while raising funds through bond offerings.
Earlier, news reports have said the Adani Group had agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to settle a US sanctions investigation and had come as the group retained new lawyers linked to President Donald Trump.
The new ruling did not dismiss the entire five-count indictment against all eight defendants. Garaufis reserved judgment on foreign bribery and obstruction charges against Ranjit Gupta, Cyril Cabanes, Saurabh Agarwal, Deepak Malhotra and Rupesh Agarwal.
The judge ordered the Justice Department to provide sufficient factual support for dismissing those charges by August 31.
Garaufis also stressed that dismissing the fraud charges should not be taken as agreement with the department’s decision or as an opinion on the merits of the allegations.
Separate civil enforcement proceedings brought by the US Securities and Exchange Commission remain distinct from the criminal case and are not automatically ended by the ruling. (IANS)
