Top Indian lawyers defend Adani Group against US bribery charges, deny FCPA violations

The Adani Group has strongly denied allegations of bribery and violations of the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) in a case filed by the US Department of Justice (DOJ). The DOJ's case involves Chairman Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani, and senior executive Vneet Jaain, accusing them of being part of a scheme that paid USD 265 million in bribes to Indian officials to secure solar electricity contracts in India. However, the Adani Group clarified that none of the three executives face charges under the FCPA, which is a critical point in the legal defense.

In a filing with the stock exchange, Adani Green Energy Ltd, the company central to the allegations, made clear that the charges pertain to securities fraud conspiracy, wire fraud conspiracy, and securities fraud, but not FCPA violations. The filing also noted that while the complaint seeks civil monetary penalties, it does not specify any amounts or fines that could result from the charges.

The indictment claims that the bribery scheme was intended to secure solar electricity contracts, which were expected to generate approximately USD 2 billion in profits over 20 years. However, the Adani Group has disputed these claims, stating that they are unfounded and that the charges are based on misleading information. The company maintains that the executives named in the case have not been implicated in any bribery activities under the FCPA.

Top Indian legal experts, including former Attorney General Mukul Rohatgi and senior advocate Mahesh Jethmalani, have been engaged to defend the Adani Group against the charges. Rohatgi, after reviewing the 54-page indictment, pointed out that Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani are not named in two of the most important counts of the indictment—Count 1 and Count 5. These counts are primarily focused on other individuals and entities, and the Adani executives are not directly implicated in the alleged bribery scheme.

Rohatgi also highlighted that the indictment lacks specific details, such as the names of officials who were allegedly bribed or the manner in which the bribes were paid. According to him, the allegations are vague, making it impossible for the accused to mount a meaningful defense. He also noted that the charges mainly involve other individuals, and the Adani executives are only loosely connected to the case.

The Adani Group’s legal defense is centered around the argument that the charges lack substance and credible evidence. Mahesh Jethmalani, another key defender, criticized the nature of the allegations, stating that the charges are vague and politically motivated. He also questioned the timing of the DOJ's actions, suggesting that the indictment may be a result of geopolitical factors, including Gautam Adani's public congratulation of former US President Donald Trump after his electoral success. Jethmalani expressed doubts over the speed with which the DOJ has pursued the case, calling it “hasty” and lacking in critical detail.

The Adani Group has reiterated its commitment to addressing the charges through all available legal channels. The company’s statement emphasized that it will use every legal recourse to clear the names of its executives and defend the integrity of its business practices. The group has made it clear that it categorically denies the bribery allegations and is prepared to challenge the charges in court.

Legal experts and the Adani Group maintain that the charges are politically motivated, with opposition parties using the case to deflect from their political setbacks, particularly in light of the results of the Maharashtra elections. Jethmalani argued that the opposition is using foreign-linked issues like the Adani case to shift focus from domestic issues, which he claims is against India’s national interests.

As the case continues, the Adani Group remains firm in its resolve to fight the allegations, asserting that it will not be deterred by what it sees as politically motivated charges. The company has vowed to pursue the matter through the courts to clear its name and protect its business interests.