US federal judge questions DOJ decision to drop Adani charges

Judge says DOJ’s reasoning for dropping Adani charges lacks clarity, orders detailed explanation from prosecutorsA United States federal judge has ordered the US Justice Department (DOJ) to justify its decision to drop criminal charges against Indian billionaire Adani" class="entity-link entity-person" data-entity-id="127076" data-entity-type="person">Gautam Adani.Friday’s request comes a month after the DOJ said it would no longer seek prosecution. Adani’s lawyers had asked Brooklyn-based US District Judge Nicholas Garaufis on Wednesday to formally dismiss the case.Recommended Stories list of 4 itemslist 1 of 4Apple, Microsoft hike prices over surging chip costslist 2 of 4‘Affordability crisis’: How the Western housing crisis spiralledlist 3 of 4Iraq’s new PM launches anticorruption campaign, but is it enough?list 4 of 4New York City freezes rents for one million regulated apartmentsend of listIn a written ruling published to the court docket on Wednesday, Garaufis said federal prosecutors’ notice that they would abandon the case did not sufficiently explain their decision and gave them a July 13 deadline to submit more information.“The Government’s terse, bland and conclusory statement affords the court neither a sufficient basis to reach any conclusion, nor the opportunity to conduct any analysis of the Government’s request for dismissal,” Garaufis wrote.Robert Giuffra, a lawyer for Adani, referred to the letter he wrote to Garaufis on Wednesday, arguing the case should be dismissed because it was beyond the reach of US law and because prosecutors would be unable to prove the alleged bribery in India.The case was dropped by the DOJ after Adani pledged a $10bn investment in the US.Adani, who is currently the 17th richest person in the world according to Bloomberg’s Billionaire Index, was charged back in 2024 for agreeing to bribe Indian government officials in order to secure a contract to build a solar power plant. That came amidst other allegations that the company misled US investors about its anti-corruption practices.