It is a tumultuous time for Gautam Adani, the billionaire chairman of one of India’s biggest corporate conglomerates, the Adani Group, and one of the richest people in the world.
Adani and others have been accused of conspiring to pay about $ 265 million in bribes to Indian government officials in order to develop India’s largest solar power plant project, according to the SEC.
Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani, and five others were indicted by US authorities in November. The Adani Group has rejected these claims, calling them baseless.
Amid all this, Adani remains defiant. At a ceremony he was attending in the western Indian city of Jaipur on Sunday, Adani said, “This is not the first time we have faced such challenges. Every attack makes us stronger and every obstacle becomes a stepping stone.” Adani made the statement in his first public appearance since the indictment.
The indictment and jurisdiction complexities
An empanelled jury and a judge are persuaded that there is sufficient evidence to warrant a continuing investigation and possibly a trial as a result, according to Irfan Nooruddin, a renowned expert on US SEC corruption cases, in an interview with Indian newspaper The Print. However, the bar for a grand jury indictment is lower than the bar for a jury trial, he added.
The recent allegations also highlight jurisdictional complexities.
According to senior Indian criminal lawyer Vikas Pahwa, “The Prevention of Corruption Act [PCA] mandates investigations into bribery involving Indian officials be conducted by Indian authorities like the CBI [Central Bureau of Investigation],” Trials, if any, would also fall under Indian jurisdiction”.
However, the US Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) governs acts of bribery involving US-linked entities, such as those using US financial systems or targeting American investors.
Adani and others have been accused of defrauding US investors during a $600 million bond offering, which was later dropped once the allegations were made public.
While this establishes potential US jurisdiction, such cases must align with international legal principles and respect India’s sovereignty, pointed out Pahwa.
Both countries must work together to ensure that evidence complies with international standards because both countries have signed the Mutual Legal Assistance Treaties (MLATs).
Adani’s defense may argue that there is no direct US connection to the alleged acts, while putting an emphasis on Indian anticorruption laws, Pahwa said. Meaning, if an investigation in India clears Adani and his co-accused of these charges, that would work in their defence in the US, he said.
In order to bring the accused to the US for a trial, the US needs to submit a formal extradition request to the Indian government. New Delhi claimed earlier this month that it had not received any of these requests. Since then, the government hasn’t provided any updates.
Adani will need to present his case in a US court before he can proceed with his defense. He’s not sure if he’ll do that. If he asks for a quick trial in a US court, he will be entitled to one within 70 days.
According to Niranjan Adhikari, managing attorney at Adhikari Law in Washington, “They can begin the trial in absentia and issue lookout notices to the defendants if they do not present themselves in a defined period of time,” which is set by the jury at the trial.
US Attorney Breon Peace, who unveiled the charges, can issue international arrest warrants for Adani and his co-defendants. They could be detained abroad (Interpol has no jurisdiction in India), which would impede their travel, if there were to be such a lookout notice or international warrant.
India is required to take the request into account if it comes in because the US and India have an extradition treaty.
A court in India would have to take into account several factors, including whether the offense he was accused of in the US was motivated by political ambitions or whether he might receive cruel treatment there.
However, extradition cases are often prolonged, and Adani could fight it.
According to critics, Adani is also portrayed as close to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, and his relationship with him may help him refute these accusations in India. The government has for the time being forced to distance itself and state that the US Department of Justice and private companies are involved in this legal dispute. At this time, we are not a part of it, according to Randhir Jaiswal, a spokesman for India’s foreign ministry, during a news conference on November 29.
Adani could file an appeal against the verdict against him if a jury of 12 had to choose him unanimously.
