A U.S. federal court has raised concerns over inconsistencies in the Department of Justice’s decision to dismiss criminal charges against billionaire Gautam Adani and seven associates, related to a $250 million bribery case. In response, Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis of the Eastern District of New York has ordered U.S. Attorney Joseph Nocella Jr. to provide a sworn statement detailing his involvement in this decision and to reveal if there are other reasons for the dismissal.
This order follows submissions from Adani’s legal team, which included a May 11 email from Nocella. The email referred to a proposal by Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, and Vneet Jaain to invest $10 billion in the U.S. as a potential resolution to the charges. Nocella had “categorically rejected” this proposal, yet the court noted the email seemed to contradict a prior statement from Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Trent McCotter, who claimed to be the sole authority on the dismissal decision.
Judge Garaufis pointed out that Nocella’s email indicated his active role in the decision-making process as recently as May 11, just a week before the DOJ filed to dismiss the indictment. The court noted that while Nocella signed the dismissal motion, he did not sign McCotter’s subsequent explanatory letter.
The email from Nocella explicitly stated, “The portion of the joint defense offer…to resolve the criminal charges against them by, in part, a general proposal to invest $10 billion in the United States is categorically rejected by this Office.” It also mentioned that other grounds for resolving the charges were being considered.
Judge Garaufis criticized both parties for their piecemeal disclosure of information, which has only led to more questions. Nocella is now required to confirm under oath whether he concurs with all the reasons for dismissal outlined in McCotter’s July 4 letter and whether additional grounds exist, providing factual support for them. This statement must be submitted by July 17.
More Read
Previously, Adani submitted an affidavit on July 15 asserting he was unaware of any quid pro quo influencing the DOJ’s decision. He denied any knowledge of promises or agreements in connection with the proposed dismissal. The affidavit was in response to the court’s July 8 order, which sought clarity on the connection between Adani’s investment pledge and the DOJ’s decision.
Adani claimed he announced the $10 billion U.S. investment in November 2024, before the indictment and the SEC’s complaint were made public, and was unaware of these proceedings at the time. His lawyers later suggested during settlement talks that the investment pledge could be part of a resolution, but Nocella informed them that it wouldn’t be considered for the dismissal decision.
The court’s scrutiny of Nocella’s involvement suggests he was engaged in discussions about resolving the case shortly before the DOJ moved to dismiss the charges. The indictment accused Gautam Adani and others of devising a scheme to bribe Indian state government officials to expedite a project, with an alleged ₹2,029 crore (about $265 million) in bribes earmarked for state electricity officials, predominantly in Andhra Pradesh.
More Read
The DOJ later sought to drop the indictment, describing it in a July 4 response as a “name and shame” indictment with little chance of trial, given its primarily foreign context involving Indian nationals. Judge Garaufis, invoking Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, insisted on substantial and genuine grounds for the government’s dismissal request.
With Adani’s affidavit and the court’s further inquiry into Nocella’s actions, the legal proceedings continue to unfold. Representation for Adani includes Sullivan & Cromwell LLP’s Robert J. Giuffra Jr. and James McDonald, among others, with notable legal figures representing other defendants.
