Adani Denies Quid Pro Quo Allegations in US Bribery Case
Gautam Adani, a prominent industrialist, has submitted an affidavit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York addressing the dismissal of criminal charges against him. This move follows the US Department of Justice’s decision to drop a bribery case involving allegations of a $250 million scheme.
In the affidavit, filed on July 15, Adani firmly stated his lack of knowledge concerning any quid pro quo related to the DOJ’s motion to dismiss the indictment against him and seven others. He emphasized that he was not aware of any promises, offers, agreements, or exchanges that might have influenced the DOJ’s decision.
The affidavit responds to a court order issued on July 8 by Senior Judge Nicholas G. Garaufis. The order required Adani to clarify whether any form of exchange was involved in the dismissal of the indictment. Specifically, the court sought answers to two pivotal questions:
- Was anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted by anyone in relation to the indictment’s dismissal?
- Was there any agreement to exchange anything for the dismissal of the indictment?
A significant portion of the affidavit addresses a social media post made by Adani in November 2024. In this post, he pledged a $10 billion investment in US energy and infrastructure projects. The court’s order highlighted media reports suggesting this pledge could be related to the dismissal of the charges.
Adani clarified that when he made the investment announcement on the platform X, he was unaware of the indictment or the SEC complaint, which had not been unsealed at that time. His legal team, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, engaged in discussions with the DOJ and SEC regarding potential settlements. During these discussions, the investment pledge was mentioned, but the DOJ ultimately decided it would not factor into their decision to seek dismissal.
More Read
Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter, responding to the court’s inquiry, claimed responsibility for the decision to dismiss the charges. He rejected any connection between the dismissal and Adani’s investment pledge. However, the court noted that the response introduced the notion of a previously undisclosed agreement involving one or more defendants.
The original indictment alleged that Adani and several others orchestrated a scheme to bribe Indian state government officials, promising bribes totaling approximately ₹2,029 crore ($265 million) to secure solar power contracts. Despite the DOJ’s request to dismiss the indictment, Judge Garaufis initially refused to grant immediate approval, seeking a detailed explanation from the DOJ.
The DOJ, in its response on July 4, described the indictment as a “name and shame” action initiated during the Biden administration’s final days. It argued that the case predominantly involved foreign nationals and lacked realistic prospects for trial.
More Read
Judge Garaufis, in his July 8 order, emphasized the importance of ensuring that the government’s reasons for seeking dismissal are substantial and genuine. With no evidence of an undisclosed agreement, the court requested Adani’s affidavit for further clarity before making a final decision.
Representing Adani in the proceedings are Sullivan & Cromwell LLP’s Robert J. Giuffra Jr. and James McDonald, with additional representation from Timothy Sini (Nixon Peabody) and Andrey Spektor (Norton Rose Fulbright). Other defendants have enlisted legal representation from notable firms, including HSF Kramer, Brown Rudnick, Debevoise & Plimpton, White & Case, and Steptoe.
