US DoJ: Adani Securities Charges Should Never Have Been Brought, Seeks Permanent Dismissal

The US Department of Justice moved to dismiss the Adani-related indictment, arguing the case was legally unsustainable and diplomatically counterproductive. The filing details six reasons for withdrawal and questions the applicability of securities fraud and FCPA charges, affecting future multipartite enforcement approaches.

The US Department of Justice (DoJ) has strongly defended its decision to withdraw the criminal case against industrialist Gautam Adani and seven others, telling a federal court that the prosecution was legally unsustainable, diplomatically counterproductive, and inconsistent with the Trump administration's enforcement priorities.

In a strongly worded 10-page court filing, the DoJ stated that the case "should have been dropped a year ago—or never brought in the first place." It urged the court to dismiss the indictment with prejudice, ensuring that the charges cannot be refiled in the future. The filing came after US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis asked the department to justify its earlier request for dismissal, describing its initial motion as "terse, bland, and conclusory."

The case was originally filed in 2024 during the Biden administration. Prosecutors alleged that Gautam Adani and others were involved in a scheme to pay approximately USD 250 million in bribes to Indian government officials and mislead investors to raise billions of dollars in investments. According to the indictment, Adani Green Energy Ltd had raised at least USD 175 million from US investors during the period under investigation.

DOJ: Decision to Drop Charges Was "Not a Close Call"

Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R. Trent McCotter, who signed the filing, said the decision to seek dismissal followed months of meetings with defence lawyers, a review of hundreds of pages of legal submissions, and his own independent legal assessment. "The decision to seek dismissal was not a close call," McCotter wrote.

The department also warned that forcing prosecutors to publicly explain dismissal decisions could discourage future withdrawals of weak cases, expose privileged internal deliberations, and infringe upon the executive branch's constitutional authority over criminal prosecutions.

Six Reasons for Dropping the Case

The DoJ outlined six key reasons for abandoning the prosecution: - The alleged conduct was overwhelmingly centred in India. - Indian authorities had already investigated the allegations and found no actionable misconduct. - Investors did not suffer any financial losses. - Most evidence and witnesses were located outside the United States. - The accused were unlikely to appear before a US court. - The prosecution faced significant evidentiary and legal challenges.

Calling it "a foreign case," McCotter argued that the matter primarily involved Indian individuals, Indian government contracts, and electricity projects in India. "The United States pretending to be the world's police can cause diplomatic strife and wastes resources better spent on domestic concerns. India can better manage its internal systems than prosecutors in Brooklyn and Washington," the filing stated.

Securities Fraud Charges Questioned

The department also argued that the criminal securities fraud charges against Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, and Cyril Cabanes lacked a sound legal foundation. According to the filing, the alleged misconduct took place almost entirely outside the United States, while the securities transactions did not satisfy US jurisdictional requirements.

The DoJ further noted that investors had not lost money, as the notes in question had either been fully repaid or continued to be serviced. It also questioned whether statements cited in the indictment constituted criminal fraud, describing many of them as corporate "puffery" and general business optimism that sophisticated institutional investors were unlikely to rely upon.

"The securities charges should never have been brought," McCotter wrote, adding that even if concerns existed, they were more appropriate for civil proceedings than criminal prosecution.

FCPA Charges No Longer Fit DOJ Policy

The filing also stated that the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) charges no longer aligned with the Justice Department's current enforcement policy under Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche's June 2025 memorandum. The updated policy prioritises cases involving US national security, transnational criminal organisations, serious misconduct, or harm to American companies.

According to the DoJ, the allegations in the Adani case did not involve organised crime, national security concerns, harm to US businesses, or egregious misconduct. "The alleged conduct did not involve criminal organisations, did not have any effect on US companies, did not implicate national security, and has already been investigated in India," the filing stated.

DOJ Rejects Investment-Linked Dismissal Claims

McCotter also dismissed media reports suggesting that the case was dropped in exchange for potential investment commitments by the Adani Group in the United States. He called such allegations "false" and clarified that investment discussions had no bearing on the department's decision.

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

DOJ Urges Immediate Dismissal

The Justice Department 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. The defendants have been held in limbo on charges that should have been dropped a year ago—or never brought in the first place," the filing concluded.