Adani Group Chairman Gautam Adani has denied under oath that there was any promise, agreement or deal behind the U.S. Department of Justice’s move to dismiss a criminal indictment against him, saying, in a sworn affidavit, that he was unaware of any exchange connected to the decision.

U.S. judge ends graft case against Gautam Adani

The affidavit was filed in response to a July 8 order by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York asking Mr. Adani to state under oath whether he was aware of any promise, offer or agreement related to the dismissal of the indictment.

Mr. Adani said he was not aware of “anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted” by anyone in connection with the dismissal, and denied knowledge of any agreement involving an exchange of anything of value for dropping the criminal charges.

The Justice Department had moved to dismiss charges filed in 2024 under the Biden administration, accusing Mr. Adani and seven others of participating in a scheme to pay about $250 million in bribes to Indian officials to secure power supply contracts and misleading investors while raising capital in U.S. markets.

Mr. Adani has denied the allegations.

Addressing speculation over Adani Group’s proposed U.S. investment plans, Adani said the group’s intention to invest $10 billion in the United States had been publicly announced on November 13, 2024, before the indictment was unsealed.

According to the affidavit, Mr. Adani’s legal counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, held meetings with officials from the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and submitted a white paper, expert reports and other materials.

The counsel also indicated that the proposed investment could potentially form part of a resolution if U.S. authorities chose to consider it.

The DoJ later informed counsel that the proposed investment would not be considered in deciding whether to seek dismissal, and Mr. Adani said the investment plan played no role in the department’s decision.

The affidavit follows a July 4 filing by the DoJ in which prosecutors rejected reports linking the dismissal of the case to investment commitments in the U.S., calling such claims false.

Also read: Gautam Adani agrees to $18 million penalty in U.S. bribery case

The department said the prosecution faced legal and evidentiary challenges, including that the alleged conduct was largely centred in India, involved no identified investor losses, and was already subject to investigations in India.

The DoJ also told the court that the indictment appeared to have been unsealed during the final days of the Joe Biden administration as a “name-and-shame” action, leaving the matter for the succeeding Donald Trump Administration.

The indictment, announced in November 2024, triggered a sharp sell-off in Adani Group stocks, wiping out nearly Rs 2.85 lakh crore in market capitalisation over four trading sessions and affecting millions of shareholders.

The Department of Justice has since sought dismissal of the criminal proceedings with prejudice, which would bring the case to a final close.

The affidavit was filed in response to a directive from U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis, who sought clarity on whether Adani was aware of any promise, offer, agreement or benefit linked to the Justice Department’s decision to seek dismissal of criminal charges against him.

Judge Garaufis had directed Mr. Adani to submit the affidavit by July 15 before deciding on the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the indictment with prejudice. The judge asked Mr. Adani to disclose whether any exchange, arrangement or understanding was connected to the government’s move to drop the charges.

The order followed a filing by Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter, who said he was the “final and sole decision-maker” behind the Justice Department’s move to dismiss the case and rejected media reports that the decision was linked to Adani Group’s plans to invest about $10 billion in the United States.

“The current or former Department attorneys…have suggested that I sought dismissal of the securities charges at least in part because of some promise by those defendants to invest money in the United States. That is false,” Mr. McCotter wrote.

“I would have sought dismissal of the securities charges regardless of any mentions of investments,” he added.

“The mention of potential investments could not have played any role.” Mr. McCotter said he sought dismissal because the securities fraud case was legally “indefensible”, arguing that most of the alleged conduct occurred in India, Indian authorities had found no actionable misconduct, investors had suffered no losses, key evidence and witnesses were outside the United States, and the defendants were unlikely to appear before a U.S. court.

He also said charges under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act no longer aligned with the Trump administration’s enforcement priorities, which focus on cases involving U.S. national security, American companies or transnational criminal organisations.

Judge Garaufis, however, said Mr. McCotter’s filing introduced “for the first time” the possibility that some form of agreement involving one or more defendants may have existed in connection with the dismissal, even though no such arrangement had been disclosed to the court.

The judge said Mr. Adani’s lawyers had earlier explained why the defendants consented to the government’s motion to dismiss, but had made no reference to any agreement, including one involving a commitment to invest in the United States.

Before approving the government’s request under Rule 48 (a), Judge Garaufis said the court must be satisfied that the Justice Department’s reasons for seeking dismissal are genuine and that no undisclosed agreement influenced its decision.

Published – July 15, 2026 10:08 pm IST

Adani Group Chairman Gautam Adani has denied under oath that there was any promise, agreement or deal behind the U.S. Department of Justice’s move to dismiss a criminal indictment against him, saying, in a sworn affidavit, that he was unaware of any exchange connected to the decision.

The affidavit was filed in response to a July 8 order by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York asking Mr. Adani to state under oath whether he was aware of any promise, offer or agreement related to the dismissal of the indictment.

Mr. Adani said he was not aware of “anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted” by anyone in connection with the dismissal, and denied knowledge of any agreement involving an exchange of anything of value for dropping the criminal charges.

The Justice Department had moved to dismiss charges filed in 2024 under the Biden administration, accusing Mr. Adani and seven others of participating in a scheme to pay about $250 million in bribes to Indian officials to secure power supply contracts and misleading investors while raising capital in U.S. markets.

Mr. Adani has denied the allegations.

Addressing speculation over Adani Group’s proposed U.S. investment plans, Adani said the group’s intention to invest $10 billion in the United States had been publicly announced on November 13, 2024, before the indictment was unsealed.

According to the affidavit, Mr. Adani’s legal counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, held meetings with officials from the U.S. Department of Justice (DoJ) and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and submitted a white paper, expert reports and other materials.

The counsel also indicated that the proposed investment could potentially form part of a resolution if U.S. authorities chose to consider it.

The DoJ later informed counsel that the proposed investment would not be considered in deciding whether to seek dismissal, and Mr. Adani said the investment plan played no role in the department’s decision.

The affidavit follows a July 4 filing by the DoJ in which prosecutors rejected reports linking the dismissal of the case to investment commitments in the U.S., calling such claims false.

Also read: Gautam Adani agrees to $18 million penalty in U.S. bribery case

The department said the prosecution faced legal and evidentiary challenges, including that the alleged conduct was largely centred in India, involved no identified investor losses, and was already subject to investigations in India.

The DoJ also told the court that the indictment appeared to have been unsealed during the final days of the Joe Biden administration as a “name-and-shame” action, leaving the matter for the succeeding Donald Trump Administration.

The indictment, announced in November 2024, triggered a sharp sell-off in Adani Group stocks, wiping out nearly Rs 2.85 lakh crore in market capitalisation over four trading sessions and affecting millions of shareholders.

The Department of Justice has since sought dismissal of the criminal proceedings with prejudice, which would bring the case to a final close.

The affidavit was filed in response to a directive from U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis, who sought clarity on whether Adani was aware of any promise, offer, agreement or benefit linked to the Justice Department’s decision to seek dismissal of criminal charges against him.

Judge Garaufis had directed Mr. Adani to submit the affidavit by July 15 before deciding on the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the indictment with prejudice. The judge asked Mr. Adani to disclose whether any exchange, arrangement or understanding was connected to the government’s move to drop the charges.

The order followed a filing by Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter, who said he was the “final and sole decision-maker” behind the Justice Department’s move to dismiss the case and rejected media reports that the decision was linked to Adani Group’s plans to invest about $10 billion in the United States.

“The current or former Department attorneys…have suggested that I sought dismissal of the securities charges at least in part because of some promise by those defendants to invest money in the United States. That is false,” Mr. McCotter wrote.

“I would have sought dismissal of the securities charges regardless of any mentions of investments,” he added.

“The mention of potential investments could not have played any role.” Mr. McCotter said he sought dismissal because the securities fraud case was legally “indefensible”, arguing that most of the alleged conduct occurred in India, Indian authorities had found no actionable misconduct, investors had suffered no losses, key evidence and witnesses were outside the United States, and the defendants were unlikely to appear before a U.S. court.

He also said charges under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act no longer aligned with the Trump administration’s enforcement priorities, which focus on cases involving U.S. national security, American companies or transnational criminal organisations.

Judge Garaufis, however, said Mr. McCotter’s filing introduced “for the first time” the possibility that some form of agreement involving one or more defendants may have existed in connection with the dismissal, even though no such arrangement had been disclosed to the court.

The judge said Mr. Adani’s lawyers had earlier explained why the defendants consented to the government’s motion to dismiss, but had made no reference to any agreement, including one involving a commitment to invest in the United States.

Before approving the government’s request under Rule 48 (a), Judge Garaufis said the court must be satisfied that the Justice Department’s reasons for seeking dismissal are genuine and that no undisclosed agreement influenced its decision.

Published – July 15, 2026 10:08 pm IST

Indian billionaire Gautam Adani.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

The U.S. fraud case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani appears to be backed by documents that will help prosecutors make a strong case, legal experts said, but the tycoon is unlikely to be extradited to stand trial anytime soon.

Federal prosecutors in Brooklyn last month unsealed an indictment accusing Mr. Adani of bribing Indian officials to convince them to buy electricity produced by Adani Green Energy, a subsidiary of his Adani Group conglomerate, and then misleading U.S. investors by providing reassuring information about the company’s anti-corruption practices.

Gautam Adani indictment: In-depth coverage

Mr. Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani, and another Adani Group executive were charged with securities fraud and conspiracy. Five people affiliated with Azure Power Global, a formerly-U.S.-listed company also allegedly involved, were charged with conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

Azure has said it had cooperated with the investigation and that those charged were no longer with the company. Adani Group has called the allegations “baseless” and vowed to seek “all possible legal recourse.”

Gautam Adani is not in custody. He has made at least two public appearances in India since the indictment, including at a Dec. 9 event also attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

According to the indictment, prosecutors found ledgers of the alleged payments on Sagar Adani’s cellular phone, which they called “bribe notes.” Prosecutors also said Gautam Adani emailed himself a copy of a search warrant and grand jury subpoena the FBI had served on his nephew on March 17, 2023.

Those electronic records could be important pieces of evidence for prosecutors to try to prove that Sagar Adani and Gautam Adani knew they misled investors by failing to disclose the investigation and insisting they had strong anti-corruption practices when in fact they had paid bribes, experts said.

“The allegations include references to corroborating material, and that always provides for a stronger case,” said Stephen Reynolds, a former federal prosecutor and current partner at law firm Day Pitney.

To be sure, prosecutors may face challenges. Gautam Adani could argue that he was not personally involved in crafting the statements the company made to investors about its anti-bribery practices, said Paul Tuchmann, a former federal prosecutor in Brooklyn and now a partner at law firm Wiggin & Dana.

Prosecutors may also struggle to secure live testimony from witnesses in India because the process could require assistance from New Delhi, and the government may be reluctant to facilitate testimony that could paint Indian officials in an unfavorable light, said Mark Cohen, a former federal prosecutor in Brooklyn and current partner at law firm Cohen & Gresser.

India’s Foreign Ministry on Friday referred to a Nov. 29 statement in which it said it had not received any request on the case from Washington, and called the case a matter between private firms and the U.S. Justice Department.

The U.S. Justice Department declined to comment on whether the United States had asked India to extradite Gautam Adani.

‘PLAY BY THE RULES’

Both Adani Group and Mr. Adani himself have recently made public statements emphasizing that the conglomerate’s executives had not been charged with violating the FCPA.

Conspiracy to violate the FCPA is punishable by up to five years behind bars. The fraud charges Gautam Adani and the other Adani Group defendants face are each punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

Drew Rolle, the deputy chief of the business and securities fraud section at the Brooklyn U.S. Attorney’s office, said his office had a responsibility to protect the integrity of U.S. capital markets.

Also Read | The return of the Adani solar beam 

The office has secured a number of convictions in foreign bribery cases with U.S. connections. In August, jurors found Mozambique’s former finance minister guilty on fraud and money laundering conspiracy charges for embezzling loan proceeds he had told banks were destined for economic development projects.

Rolle said honest companies are harmed when firms like Mr. Adani’s allegedly mislead investors.

“It’s not only a bribery case, it’s an important securities enforcement case,” he said at a Dec. 6 conference in New York hosted by the Practicing Law Institute. “If you’re going to access our capital markets, you’re going to play by the rules.”

Indian billionaire Gautam Adani.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

An Indian government agency charged with promoting renewable energy has changed the way it issues power tenders to reduce the risk of corruption after U.S. allegations of bribery in some tenders, said an official with direct knowledge of the matter.

The Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) earns commission for linking renewable energy producers with buyers. It was an intermediary in solar power deals involving Adani Group and several states where U.S. authorities have said bribes were paid to unidentified officials between 2021 and 2022.

Gautam Adani indictment: In-depth coverage

The ports-to-power Adani Group has denied the allegations, calling them baseless.

U.S. authorities have not accused SECI of any wrongdoing.

SECI, which selects renewable energy producers for projects through bids and then signs deals with power buyers, said last month it had “no basis so far” to investigate the allegations and that it was “not clear if any of SECI’s covenants have been violated”.

About 75% of SECI’s new bids for renewable power will now be based on specific demand from states instead of the earlier practice of mainly seeking power suppliers first through tenders and then approaching buyers, said the SECI official, who did not want to be named, citing the sensitivity of the matter.

A spokesperson for SECI did not immediately respond to a request for comment outside regular business hours on Monday.

The official said the earlier practice, which used to account for about 90% of the bids, had raised the risk of corruption by power producers seeking to influence buyers in states to sign up to deals even if they did not need the power. The official did not name any companies or give any examples.

The source said SECI had not found any reason to independently investigate any deals it had been part of and that no agency within India or outside had reached out to it.

The allegations against the Adani Group, nevertheless, could temporarily cut foreign investments in India’s renewable sector, said the source, adding that SECI expected tendering to slow down for the rest of the fiscal year that ends on March 31.

Also Read | The return of the Adani solar beam 

SECI’s target for this fiscal year was to find bidders for 15 gigawatts (GW) of power, but it has managed only about 6-7 GW so far.

India is still more than 10% short of its pledge to add 175 GW of renewable power by 2022. It wants to reach 500 GW by 2030.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
| Photo Credit: PTI

The U.S. reacted sharply on Saturday (December 7, 2024) to the Bharatiya Janata Party’s allegation that the U.S. State Department was behind targeted attacks against Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Indian businessman Gautam Adani, denying the accusations and saying they were “disappointing”. In response to the series of social media posts released by the BJP on “X”, which included accusations that it was behind an investigative reporting portal OCCRP, the U.S. government said it had been a “champion of media freedom around the world”, and does not influence editorial decisions by these organisations. 

“It is disappointing that the ruling party in India would make these kinds of accusations,” a spokesperson for the U.S. Embassy in New Delhi told The Hindu. “The U.S. has long been a champion of media freedom around the world. A free and independent press is an essential component of any democracy, enabling informed and constructive debate and holding those in power accountable,” the spokesperson added, in an apparent reference to the BJP handle’s allegation that news reports including a story in the Financial Times linking Mr. Modi and Mr. Adani and a series of reports in the OCCRP (Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project) on the Adani group’s projects in Kenya and Myanmar, had been funded by the US State department. In addition, the BJP had referred to OCCRP reports on Pegasus spy software used for the surveillance of Indian journalists and on Russian President Vladimir Putin. 

This is the first time the ruling party has directly attacked the U.S. government for stories that are critical of the Modi government which it said had a damaging impact on “India’s image”. The strong statements exchanged indicate a new low in ties between New Delhi and Washington, that have been under a strain over indictments in the case against an Indian official for an alleged assassination plot on Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, a Khalistani activist in the US, and a number of other developments in the U.S. Earlier this year, the MEA had summoned a senior US diplomat after the U.S. State department had commented on the arrest of Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, and had sharply objected to the U.S. State Department’s report on Religious Freedom in India.

The latest controversy comes days after the U.S. Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchanges Commission filed indictments in U.S. courts implicating Mr. Adani and members of his family and group for bribery, exchanges fraud and other violations of U.S. law. 

The Ministry of External Affairs has thus far refused to comment on the statements made by both the BJP and the U.S. Embassy response. Last week, the MEA spokesperson had distanced the government from the Adani indictment.

The U.S. Embassy spokesperson did not deny the allegation it was funding of groups like OCCRP, but said that the U.S. government “works with independent organizations on programming that supports professional development and capacity building training for journalists,” adding that this “programming does not influence the editorial decisions or direction of these organisations”.

The BJP, had, in its posts and a number of press statements cited an investigation in the French media agency Mediaparte to back its claims that the U.S. government through USAID, the State department’s development assistance arm, had an inordinate influence over the reportage undertaken by OCCRP, that is shared with a consortium of news agencies worldwide. 

“It has always been the US State department behind this agenda”, the BJP had said. “In fact, 50% of OCCRP’s funding comes directly from the U.S. State Department. OCCRP has served as a media tool for carrying out a Deep State agenda,” it said a post, adding that the “Deep State had a clear objective to destabilise India by targeting Prime Minister Modi”. 

Building on its allegation of a political conspiracy involving various arms of the U.S. Government, and specifically the Biden Administration, the BJP had cited the presence of USAID Administrator Samantha Power in Uzbekistan at the same time as Congress Leader of the Party in parliament Rahul Gandhi, as well as Mr. Gandhi’s visits to the U.S. and U.K. as proof of its accusations.

“For instance, during his secret visit to Uzbekistan last year, Samantha Power, the administrator of USAID (which funds OCCRP), was also present… The Deep State is an evil force that has brought nothing but destruction,” said the post, which also linked the stories to US businessman George Soros. It then alleged that the Congress party held press conferences to comment on the OCCRP’s reports, to “launch attacks on PM Modi, propagate false narratives, and disrupt the functioning of Parliament,” it said, naming the “U.S. Deep State” a popular term referring to US intelligence agencies. 

The comments by the BJP are unusual but could indicate a decision to attack the Biden administration that has been voted out in the U.S., with an appraisal that this would not affect ties with the incoming Trump administration. President-elect Donald Trump’s nominee for the chief of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Kash Patel as well as Director of National Intelligence designate Tulsi Gabbard have frequently targeted the American “Deep State” as well. Mr. Patel’s book “Government Gangsters” was described by Mr. Trump as a “roadmap to end the Deep State’s reign”. While the attack on the Deep State may not have raised eyebrows in Washington, the direct reference to U.S. government agencies like the U.S. State Department, USAID and specific officials is a serious escalation in the accusations, however. 

Image used for representative purpose only.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

International Holding Co’s (IHC) outlook on investments in India’s Adani Group remains unchanged, the Abu Dhabi conglomerate said following the U.S. indictment of billionaire Gautam Adani.

“Our partnership with the Adani Group reflects our confidence in their contributions to the green energy and sustainability sectors,” IHC said in a statement on Wednesday (November 27, 2024).

“As with all our investments, our team continues to evaluate relevant information and developments. At this time, our outlook on these investments remains unchanged.”

Last week, U.S. authorities accused Mr. Adani, his nephew and executive director Sagar Adani and the managing director of Adani Green, Vneet S. Jaain, of being part of a scheme to pay bribes of $265 million to secure Indian power supply contracts.

The ports-to-power conglomerate denied the charges as “baseless” and vowed to seek “all possible legal recourse”.

In October last year, IHC boosted its stake in Adani Enterprises to more than 5% after it sold down its investments in two other Adani companies. At the time, IHC said Adani Enterprises, the group’s flagship company, was “uniquely poised to capitalise on India’s robust growth journey”.

The increased investment came after short seller Hindenburg Research accused the conglomerate in January last year of stock manipulation and significantly high debt levels. Adani Group denied those allegations.

Adani and an IHC subsidiary last year formed a technology joint venture to create a platform to use AI and enterprise blockchain products to work on the digitisation of the Indian economy.

Adani Green, the company at the centre of the indictment, said on Wednesday Gautam Adani had been charged in the United States for alleged violations of securities law and faced potential fines but had not been charged under the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.

In a stock exchange filing, Adani Green said a complaint by U.S. regulator the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sought “an order directing the defendants to pay civil monetary penalties (but) it does not quantify the amount of penalty”.

The civil action launched by the SEC runs in parallel to U.S. federal prosecutors’ indictment against Mr. Adani and others.

In May, Tanzania entered into a 30-year concession agreement with Adani Ports, a unit of Adani Group, to operate a container terminal in its Dar es Salaam port, known as Container Terminal 2. File
| Photo Credit: Reuters

“Tanzania plans to honour its contracts with an Adani Group unit despite a U.S. indictment of its billionaire chairman Gautam Adani on accusations of bribery and fraud,” a senior official at the ports authority said.

Mr. Adani was indicted for fraud last week, and arrest warrants were issued for him and his nephew for their alleged roles in a $265 million scheme to bribe the officials to secure power-supply deals. Adani Group has denied the accusations.

In May, Tanzania entered into a 30-year concession agreement with Adani Ports, a unit of Adani Group, to operate a container terminal in its Dar es Salaam port, known as Container Terminal 2.

Adani Ports also struck a share purchase agreement for a 95% stake in state-owned Tanzania International Container Terminal Services for $95 million.

“We don’t have any problems with anyone. Everything we are doing is according to our laws and agreements,” Tanzania Ports Authority Director General Plasduce Mbossa told Reuters late on Tuesday (November 26, 2024) when asked about the contracts’ status.

“For contracts we have, we don’t have such claims (of wrongdoing). If there are other people who are taking actions, then they are doing so according to their reasons,” Plasduce Mbossa added.

Last week in neighbouring Kenya, President William Ruto scrapped a deal signed with a unit of Adani to build power transmission lines.

He also cancelled a proposal to add a second runway at the Jomo Kenyatta international airport and upgrade the passenger terminal in exchange for a 30-year lease.

Gautam Adani, founder chairman of the ports-to-energy conglomerate, Sagar Adani and another key executive, Vneet Jaain, have been charged by the U.S. Department of Justice with being part of an alleged scheme to pay $265 million in bribes to Indian officials. File.
| Photo Credit: PTI

Billionaire Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar Adani have not been charged with any violations of the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in the indictment filed by U.S. authorities in a court in a bribery case, the Adani Group said on Wednesday (November 27, 2024).

Gautam Adani, founder chairman of the ports-to-energy conglomerate, Sagar Adani and another key executive, Vneet Jaain, have been charged by the U.S. Department of Justice with being part of an alleged scheme to pay $265 million in bribes to Indian officials to win contracts for supply of solar electricity that would yield $2 billion profit over a 20-year period.

Editorial | ​Shielding Adani: On the U.S. indictment, the Indian government’s stand

In a stock exchange filing, Adani Green Energy Ltd, which is at the centre of the bribery allegations, said reports claiming that the three have been charged with FCPA violations “are incorrect”.

They have been charged with offences that are punishable with a monetary fine or penalty.

“Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani and Vneet Jaain have not been charged with any violation of the FCPA in the counts set forth in the indictment of the US DOJ or civil complaint of the US SEC.”

“These directors have been charged on three counts in the criminal indictment, namely (i) alleged securities fraud conspiracy, (ii) alleged wire fraud conspiracy, and (iii) alleged securities fraud,” the filing said.

The Adani Group has denied all allegations and said it will take all possible legal recourse to defend itself.

A criminal indictment has been filed before the United States District Court Eastern District of New York by the Department of Justice in the case of USA against Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani and Vneet Jaain.

“The indictment does not specify any quantum of any fine/penalty,” the company said.

The civil complaint alleges that the executives violated certain sections of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Act of 1934, and aided and abetted Adani Green Energy Limited’s violation of the Acts, it said.

“Although the complaint prays for an order directing the defendants to pay civil monetary penalties, it does not quantify the amount of penalty,” it said.

Representational image of the Adani Group logo
| Photo Credit: Reuters

Ratings agency Fitch has put some of Adani Group’s bonds on watch for a possible downgrade after some of the firm’s key executives were indicted by U.S. authorities on bribery charges.

Adani Energy Solutions Ltd, Adani Electricity Mumbai and some of Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone rupee and dollar bonds are now on “watch negative”, Fitch said.

Ratings on four Adani subsidiary senior unsecured dollar bonds were downgraded from stable to negative, the agency said.

Fitch said it would monitor the U.S. investigation for any impact on Adani’s financial position, “particularly any material deterioration in near- to medium-term funding access, including their ability to roll over existing credit lines or access new facilities, as well as potentially higher credit spreads”.

TotalEnergies to halt financial contribution

French oil major TotalEnergies said on Monday (November 25, 2024) it would halt financial contributions to its Adani Group investments following last week’s indictment.

U.S. prosecutors have charged billionaire Gautam Adani, founder of the Adani Group, and seven others for their alleged roles in a $265 million scheme to bribe Indian officials to secure power-supply deals.

The Adani Group has said the accusations as well as those levelled by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission in a parallel civil case were “baseless and denied” and that it would “seek all possible legal recourse”.

Adani dollar bonds steadied on Tuesday and prices rose slightly after three days of heavy falls.

Prices on some of the more liquid Adani Ports and Special Economic Zone debts maturing between 2027 and 2041 were up between half a cent and 1.5 cents on the dollar. They have fallen about 8-12 cents since news of the indictment.

Adani Group CFO Jugeshinder Singh.
| Photo Credit: Reuters

None of Adani group portfolio companies, comprising 11 listed firms, have been accused of any wrongdoing, conglomerate’s CFO Jugeshinder Robbie Singh said on founder and chairman Gautam Adani’s indictment on bribery charges in the US.

In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Mr. Singh said the group would make a detailed comment on the US indictment once it gets counsel approvals.

Mr. Adani and seven other defendants, including his nephew Sagar Adani, allegedly agreed to pay about $265 million in bribes to Indian government officials between approximately 2020 and 2024 to obtain lucrative solar energy supply contracts on terms that were expected to yield $2 billion of profit over 20 years, according to an indictment unsealed in a New York court on Wednesday.

The Securities and Exchange Commission of the US has also charged Mr. Adani and Mr. Sagar Adani, executives of Adani Green Energy Ltd and Cyril Cabanes, an executive of Azure Power Global, for “conduct arising out of a massive bribery scheme”.

“There is a lot of news and reports that will try to pick unrelated items and create a headline. My humble request is that we will respond in the fullness of time once we review in detail the matter as presented in the legal filing,” Mr. Singh said.

He hastened to add that no court has ruled on the indictment, and as outlined by lawyers of the US Department of Justice, these are “allegations and the accused have a presumption of innocence”.

The CFO, who was the first line of defence when US short-seller Hindenburg Research had accused the ports-to-power conglomerate of fraud in January 2023, said the group became aware of the “specificity” of the US indictment against founder and chairman Mr. Adani two days ago.

“We were aware that something is afoot (and in February 2024 144a offering circular in Risk Factors we disclosed as such. This was the first public issuance of any of our portfolio companies or their subsidiaries or joint venture companies after our annual results of 31st March 2023),” he said.

He, however, did not state what the company had disclosed in February 2024.

Adani Group, he said, has a portfolio of 11 public companies and “none are subject to indictment (i.e. defendants in any legal proceedings in the recent DOJ lawyer filings to a court in NYC)”.

“None of the issuers (i.e. companies in our portfolio or specific issuers that are subsidiaries of the public companies) are accused of any wrongdoing in the said legal filing,” he said.

The indictment “relates to one contract of Adani Green, which is roughly 10 per cent of overall business of Adani Green (there is a lot more precise and comprehensive detail of this which we will elaborate in an appropriate forum),” he said.

The statement comes two days after Mr. Adani was charged by US prosecutors over his role in an alleged years-long scheme to pay $265 million (about ₹2,200 crore) bribes to Indian officials to secure solar energy contracts. The conglomerate has denied the allegations, calling them baseless, and announced plans to seek legal recourse.

The Adani Family has 11 listed entities on the Indian stock exchanges – flagship incubator Adani Enterprises Ltd, electricity producer Adani Power Ltd, ports company Adani Ports & SEZ, power transmission firm Adani Energy Solutions Limited, renewable arm Adani Green Energy Ltd (AGEL), city gas distributor Adani Total Gas Ltd, commodities firm Adani Wilmar Ltd, media firm New Delhi Television Ltd and cement companies Ambuja Cements Limited, ACC Ltd, and Sanghi Industries Ltd.

“There is a lot of news and reports that will try to pick unrelated items and create a headline. My humble request is that we will respond in the fullness of time once we review in detail the matter as presented in the legal filing (Please note that no court has ruled on this and as outlined by lawyers of DOJ these are ‘allegations and accused have a presumption of innocence’). We will make a more detailed comment once we get counsel approvals to discuss what we can in public on a matter that is sub-judice,” he added.