This prior post highlighted the on-going saga in U.S. v. Adani et al in connection with an alleged Indian bribery scheme (see here for the original post).
Gautam Adani, and others, were charged with securities fraud conspiracy and wire fraud conspiracy and several other defendants were charged with conspiracy to violate the FCPA’s anti-bribery provisions, among other charges.
In deciding whether to dismiss the action – per the DOJ’s request – Judge Nicholas Garaufis (E.D.N.Y.) directed Adani to respond to the following questions by sworn affidavit:
(1) are you aware of anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted, by anyone, in connection with the dismissal of the Indictment?
(2) are you aware of any agreement exchanging any thing for the dismissal of the Indictment?
Adani has responded as follows:
“In response to the Court’s first question, I am not aware of anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted by anyone in connection with the dismissal of the Indictment in this action, other than that my counsel, Sullivan & Cromwell LLP, had discussions with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) regarding the settlement terms eventually agreed upon in connection with (i) the pending Amended Consent Judgement in the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) action, dated May 30, 2026, and (ii) the Settlement Agreement between the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and Adani Enterprises Limited, dated May 18, 2026.
The July 4, 2026 letter from Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter and the Court’s July 8, 2026 Order refer to press reports that the Adani Group offered to invest in the United States in exchange for the dismissal of the Indictment. Here is the background of those discussions. On November 13, 2024, I posted the following message, in part, on the social media platform X: “As the partnership between India and the United States deepens, the Adani Group is committed to leveraging its global expertise and invest $10 billion in US energy security and resilient infrastructure projects, aiming to create up to 15,000 jobs.” When I made this post, the Indictment and SEC Complaint had not yet been unsealed and made public, and I was unaware of their existence.
Earlier this year, my counsel Sullivan & Cromwell LLP held a number of meetings with the DOJ and SEC to discuss resolution of the DOJ and SEC cases. My counsel provided a comprehensive white paper, made extensive submissions, and provided expert reports to the DOJ and SEC. During these settlement discussions, I understand that my counsel suggested that my publicly stated intent to invest $10 billion in the United States might be part of a resolution of these matters if that was what the DOJ or SEC wanted. I also understand that the DOJ later informed my counsel that it would not consider this potential investment in determining whether to seek dismissal of the Indictment.
In response to this Court’s second question, I am not aware of any agreement involving any person or entity exchanging anything of value for the dismissal of the Indictment.”
