By PC Bureau
New Delhi | August 11, 2026: A US federal judge has dismissed the criminal case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani, but not before sharply questioning the Justice Department’s decision to abandon the high-profile bribery and fraud prosecution and expressing concern over the way the decision was reached.
US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis in Brooklyn granted federal prosecutors’ request to dismiss the charges, bringing an end to the criminal proceedings against Adani. But his ruling made clear that the dismissal should not be interpreted as an endorsement of the government’s decision or as a finding that the allegations against Adani lacked merit.
At the centre of the judge’s scrutiny was the conduct of senior Justice Department official Trent McCotter, who took a leading role in the decision to abandon the prosecution. Garaufis questioned why McCotter had worked with Adani’s defence lawyers on the dismissal while apparently bypassing prosecutors and investigators who had originally built the case.
The judge described the circumstances surrounding the decision as irregular and said McCotter appeared to have replaced the professional assessments of officials from several federal agencies with his own judgment.
The ruling represents a dramatic reversal in a case that began in November 2024, when US prosecutors accused Adani and several others of participating in a scheme involving alleged bribes to Indian government officials in connection with lucrative solar-energy contracts.
Adani and the Adani Group have consistently denied wrongdoing.
Judge examines the $10 billion investment pledge
One of the most sensitive issues surrounding the dismissal was a pledge attributed to Adani in 2024 to invest $10 billion in the United States.
The investment proposal became relevant after Adani’s legal team reportedly discussed the possibility of major US investments and job creation while seeking to persuade American authorities to abandon the prosecution.
That raised an obvious question: did the prospect of billions of dollars in investment influence the Justice Department’s decision?
Garaufis examined the issue before allowing the dismissal to proceed. The judge ultimately said he was satisfied that the investment pledge had not influenced the government’s decision to abandon the criminal case.
The Justice Department had maintained that the decision was based on prosecutorial considerations rather than any commercial or political arrangement.
In a July 4 filing, McCotter said the case was principally foreign in nature, difficult to prove and inconsistent with the department’s current enforcement priorities. He also said he had reached the decision after meeting with defence lawyers and other Justice Department lawyers and conducting his own research and analysis.
Judge criticises the process
While Garaufis accepted the government’s request to dismiss the case, he was far more critical of the process through which the decision was reached.
The judge questioned McCotter’s apparent failure to seek the views of the prosecutors, investigators and other officials who had spent years working on the case.
That criticism is significant because the original prosecution had involved multiple federal agencies and a detailed indictment accusing Adani and others of a major international bribery and securities-fraud scheme.
Garaufis also made clear that a judge’s role in such circumstances is limited. Prosecutors have broad discretion over whether to pursue criminal charges, and courts generally cannot force the government to continue a prosecution it no longer wishes to pursue.
The judge therefore stopped short of substituting his judgment for that of the Justice Department.
But he also made clear that the unusual circumstances surrounding the dismissal deserved scrutiny.
READ: After Talks, UNC Refuses to Lift Manipur Highway Blockade
What Adani was accused of
Adani was indicted in November 2024 along with several other defendants in connection with an alleged scheme involving a proposed 12-gigawatt solar power project.
US prosecutors alleged that Adani and associates agreed to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in bribes to Indian officials to help secure power-supply agreements that would make the project financially viable.
Prosecutors also alleged that investors in the United States were misled about the company’s anti-corruption practices.
Adani has denied the allegations, and he never appeared personally in a US courtroom to answer the criminal charges.
The case became one of the most consequential legal challenges faced by the Adani Group and attracted international attention because of Adani’s position as one of India’s most powerful industrialists.
DOJ says the case was primarily foreign
The Justice Department’s decision to abandon the prosecution represented a sharp departure from the position taken by prosecutors when the indictment was filed.
In its July filing, the department argued that the case was largely foreign in nature and presented significant evidentiary and legal difficulties. It also said pursuing the prosecution no longer fitted the department’s priorities.
The move came during President Donald Trump’s second term, amid a broader series of decisions by the Justice Department to abandon or reconsider several high-profile white-collar prosecutions initiated during the previous administration.
The Adani case was originally brought during the final months of President Joe Biden’s administration.
READ:
Adani welcomes dismissal
Adani welcomed the court’s decision, saying he accepted it with humility and respect for the judicial process.
The billionaire has consistently maintained that the allegations against him were unfounded.
The dismissal with prejudice means the criminal indictment cannot simply be revived against the defendants in its existing form.
However, the judge’s ruling does not amount to a judicial declaration that the underlying allegations were false. Garaufis specifically stressed that allowing the dismissal should not be interpreted as agreeing with the Justice Department’s reasoning or ruling on the substantive merits of the original allegations.
I welcome the US court’s decision with humility and deep respect for the judicial process.
Throughout this challenging period, our faith in truth, fairness and the rule of law remained unwavering.
My deepest gratitude to those who never lost faith in us, in the system and in…
— Gautam Adani (@gautam_adani) August 10, 2026
Separate US proceedings remain relevant
The dismissal of the criminal case does not erase all US legal matters involving Adani.
In a separate Securities and Exchange Commission proceeding, Adani agreed to pay $6 million, while his nephew Sagar Adani agreed to pay $12 million, resolving civil allegations without the criminal case continuing.
Separately, Adani Enterprises agreed to pay $275 million to the US Treasury to settle allegations involving violations of US sanctions concerning Iran.
Those proceedings are distinct from the criminal prosecution dismissed by Garaufis.
The latest ruling therefore closes one of the most closely watched criminal cases involving an Indian business tycoon in the United States, while leaving behind questions about prosecutorial discretion, the handling of high-profile foreign corruption cases and the unusual circumstances surrounding the Justice Department’s decision to walk away from the prosecution.
For Adani, however, the immediate outcome is a major legal relief: the criminal case that had threatened one of India’s most prominent corporate empires has now been formally brought to an end.
