US DoJ tells court Adani case should never have been filed, seeks permanent dismissal

By Mahima Katal

New York, July 4: The US Department of Justice (DoJ) has strongly defended its decision to withdraw the criminal case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani and seven others, arguing before a federal court that the prosecution was legally unsustainable, inconsistent with current enforcement priorities, and should never have been initiated.

In a 10-page filing submitted to the US District Court, the DoJ said the case "should have been dropped a year ago—or never brought in the first place," while maintaining that the court has only a limited role in reviewing the executive branch's decision to dismiss criminal charges with prejudice.

The filing was submitted after US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis sought a detailed explanation for the department's request to permanently dismiss the indictment, describing its earlier motion as "terse, bland, and conclusory."

The case originated in 2024 under the Biden administration, when federal prosecutors charged Gautam Adani and others with allegedly orchestrating a scheme to pay approximately USD 250 million in bribes to Indian government officials and misleading investors in order to secure billions of dollars in funding. Prosecutors had alleged that Adani Green Energy Ltd raised at least USD 175 million from US investors during the period in question.

Defending the decision to abandon the prosecution, the DoJ argued that requiring prosecutors to publicly justify dismissal decisions would discourage future withdrawals, expose privileged internal deliberations, and interfere with the executive branch's constitutional authority over prosecutorial decisions.

Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter said he personally reviewed the case after months of meetings with defence lawyers, examined hundreds of pages of submissions, and conducted an independent legal assessment before concluding that dismissal was warranted.

"The decision to seek dismissal was not a close call," McCotter wrote.

According to the department, six key factors supported dismissal. These included the fact that the alleged conduct was overwhelmingly centred in India, Indian authorities had investigated the allegations without finding actionable misconduct, investors had suffered no financial losses, most witnesses and evidence were located overseas, the defendants were unlikely to appear before a US court, and prosecutors faced significant evidentiary challenges.

Calling it "a foreign case," McCotter argued that the alleged conduct involved Indian nationals, Indian government programmes, Indian contracts, and electricity projects located entirely within India.

"The United States pretending to be the world police can cause diplomatic strife and also wastes resources better spent on domestic concerns. India can better manage its internal systems than can prosecutors in Brooklyn and Washington," the filing stated.

The DoJ also questioned the legal basis of the criminal securities fraud charges against Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, and Cyril Cabanes, contending that the alleged misconduct occurred almost entirely outside the United States and failed to satisfy US jurisdictional requirements.

It further argued that investors had not incurred financial losses because the relevant notes had either been fully repaid or continued to be serviced. The department also described several statements cited in the indictment as corporate "platitudes" and "puffery" that sophisticated institutional investors were unlikely to rely upon.

"The securities charges should never have been brought," McCotter wrote, adding that, at most, the allegations could have justified civil rather than criminal proceedings.

The department further stated that the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) charges no longer aligned with current DoJ policy under Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche's June 2025 memorandum, which directs prosecutors to prioritise cases involving US national security, transnational criminal organisations, serious misconduct, or harm to US companies.

According to the filing, the alleged conduct neither involved organised crime nor affected US companies, posed no national security concerns, and had already been investigated in India.

"The alleged conduct did not involve criminal organizations, did not have any effect on US companies, did not in any way implicate national security, was not egregious, and has been the subject of investigations in India," the department said.

McCotter also dismissed media reports suggesting that the decision to drop the case was linked to promises of future investments in the United States by the Adani Group, calling such claims "false."

"I would have sought dismissal of the securities charges regardless of any mentions of investments," he wrote. "The mention of potential investments could not have played any role."

The DoJ urged the court to promptly dismiss the indictment, arguing that continued judicial scrutiny only prolonged uncertainty for defendants facing charges that the government itself no longer believed should proceed.

"In short, there was absolutely nothing improper with the Department's as-filed dismissal motion," McCotter wrote. "The defendants have been held in limbo on charges that should have been dropped a year ago—or never brought in the first place."