New York: A US court has directed Gautam Adani to disclose whether anything was promised, offered, exchanged or accepted by anyone in connection with the US government’s request to dismiss the criminal indictment against him and seven others in a bribery case.
Judge Nicholas G Garaufis of the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York directed Adani to file an affidavit in this regard by July 15, in the case titled USA vs Gautam Adani.
Two specific questions for Adani
The court has asked Adani to answer two specific questions, whether he is aware of anything promised, offered, sought, received, agreed to, or accepted by anyone in connection with the dismissal of the indictment, and whether he is aware of any agreement exchanging anything for such dismissal.
The order came after Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General R Trent McCotter responded to the court’s earlier direction to explain why the US Department of Justice (DOJ) wanted all charges against Adani dismissed with prejudice.
McCotter, describing himself as the “final and sole decision maker” behind the request, rejected reports suggesting the decision was linked to a promise by Adani to invest in the United States.
However, the court said McCotter’s response had, for the first time, raised the possibility of an arrangement involving one or more defendants that had neither been put on record nor previously disclosed to it. “Mr McCotter’s response to the court’s June 26, 2026 Memorandum & Order raises, for the first time, the specter of a possible agreement (involving one or multiple defendants) in connection with the dismissal of the indictment that has neither been memorialized nor previously brought to the attention of this court,” the order stated.
Background of the case
The indictment had alleged that Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, Vineet Jain, Ranjit Gupta and others devised a plan to bribe Indian state government officials to push through a solar power project. According to the indictment, bribes worth Rs 2,029 crore (around USD 265 million) were promised to officials of state electricity distribution companies, of which Rs 1,750 crore was allegedly earmarked for officials in Andhra Pradesh to secure the purchase of seven gigawatts of solar power.
The DOJ subsequently moved the court seeking dismissal of the indictment against all eight accused. However, Judge Garaufis on June 25 declined to immediately allow the request and instead asked the DOJ to explain its reasons for seeking the dismissal.
‘Name and shame’ indictment: DOJ
The DOJ filed its response on July 4, describing the prosecution against Adani as a “name and shame” indictment that had been unsealed in the final days of the Biden administration without any realistic prospect of a trial. It argued that the case was overwhelmingly foreign in character, since it involved Indian nationals allegedly offering bribes to other Indian nationals in connection with an Indian electricity contract.
“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 DOJ said in its submission.
The court noted that a June 24 letter filed on behalf of three of the defendants had explained why they consented to the government’s dismissal request, but had made no mention of any agreement to drop the charges in exchange for a promise to invest in the US.
In his July 8 order, Judge Garaufis said that while considering a motion under Rule 48(a) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a court must satisfy itself that the reasons cited by the government are substantial and reflect the actual grounds for seeking dismissal. Since the court could not rule out the existence of an undisclosed agreement, it has now sought Adani’s affidavit before deciding on the government’s application to dismiss the indictment.
| | 
