U.S. DoJ says Adani case should never have been brought, urges judge to drop charges permanently

The US Department of Justice (DoJ) has strongly defended its decision to drop a criminal case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani and seven others, telling a federal judge that the prosecution was legally flawed, diplomatically counterproductive and inconsistent with the Trump administration’s enforcement priorities.

In a sharply worded 10-page filing, the Justice Department said the case “should have been dismissed a year ago or never been filed,” arguing that it had only a limited role in reviewing the court’s decision to dismiss the charges with prejudice.

Also read: Gautam Adani accepts $18 million penalty in US bribery case

The filing came after U.S. District Judge Nicholas Garaufis asked the department to explain why it wanted to permanently dismiss the indictment, calling the earlier motion “short, gentle and precise.”

The Justice Department had indicted Adani and others under the Biden administration in 2024 for their alleged involvement in a scheme to bribe Indian government officials to the tune of $250 million and lie to investors to get billions of dollars more in investments from other entities; Meanwhile, Adani Green Energy Limited was claimed to have collected at least 175 million dollars from US investors.

The Justice Department said requiring prosecutors to publicly justify their decisions to drop cases would deter future dismissals, reveal privileged internal deliberations and violate the executive branch’s constitutional authority over charging decisions.

“Judicial investigations into the grounds for dismissal would reveal privileged internal deliberations,” wrote Chief Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter, adding that such a request harms defendants by potentially deterring the Department from seeking dismissal of criminal charges it determines are not in the interest of justice.

Also read: US Judge won’t immediately dismiss charges against Gautam Adani

McCotter, who waived privilege for this case only, said he decided to dismiss the charges after months of meetings with defense attorneys, reviewing hundreds of pages of filings and conducting his own legal analysis. “The layoff decision was not a close call,” he wrote.

The department put forward six general reasons why all charges should be dropped; these include that the alleged conduct was predominantly centered in India, Indian authorities had investigated the allegations and found no actionable misconduct, investors had not suffered any financial losses, key evidence and witnesses were located abroad, the defendants were unlikely to appear before a U.S. court, and the prosecution faced significant evidentiary hurdles.

“This is a foreign case,” McCotter wrote.

The indictment concerns “several Indians (including perhaps a European or two) who attempted to bridge other Indians by paying the Indian government through complex Indian rebate programs to obtain Indian contracts to provide Indian electricity to Indians in India.”

“The United States acting as the world’s policeman could cause diplomatic wrangling and also waste resources better spent on domestic concerns. India can manage its domestic systems better than prosecutors in Brooklyn and Washington,” McCotter wrote.

The filing also argued that the criminal securities fraud charges against Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, and Cyril Cabanes lack a solid legal basis because the alleged misconduct occurred almost entirely outside the United States and the securities transactions did not meet U.S. jurisdictional requirements.

The Ministry of Justice said that investors did not lose money because the bills in question were either fully repaid or service continued. He also questioned whether the statements cited in the indictment amounted to criminal fraud, calling them largely corporate “platitudes” and “puffing”; These statements were something that sophisticated institutional investors would probably not trust.

“Securities charges should never have been brought,” McCotter wrote, adding that the allegations warrant civil rather than criminal resolution at best.

The department also said the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act charges are no longer consistent with DOJ policy under Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche’s June 2025 memo directing prosecutors to focus on cases involving U.S. national security, transnational criminal organizations, serious misconduct or harm to U.S. companies.

“The alleged conduct does not involve criminal organizations, has no impact on US companies, does not affect national security in any way, is not serious, and is the subject of investigations in India,” the filing said. “Under the Blanche Memorandum, the FCPA charges should have been dismissed a year ago.”

McCotter also rejected media reports suggesting that the Justice Department sought removal from Adani Group in exchange for the promise of U.S. investment, calling such claims “false.”

“I would like to see securities fees reduced even if investments are mentioned,” he wrote. “Talking about potential investments cannot play any role.”

The department called on the judge to immediately dismiss the case, arguing that the ongoing judicial review is prolonging uncertainty for defendants facing charges that the government no longer believes should proceed.

“In short, there was absolutely nothing improper in the request for dismissal submitted by the Department,” McCotter wrote. “The defendants are being held in limbo because of charges that should have been dropped a year ago or were never brought.”

It was published – 04 July 2026 22:08 IST