After more than 18 months of legal scrutiny in the United States, American authorities have moved toward resolving the criminal and civil proceedings against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar Adani. Reports indicate that the US Department of Justice is preparing to drop bribery and fraud charges filed against the Adanis and other associated executives, while the US Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed a settlement in a parallel civil case involving financial penalties totalling $18 million, as reported in OpIndia.
NYT Frames $10 Billion Investment As Key Factor In Settlement
At the centre of the controversy is a report published by The New York Times, which suggested that a $10 billion investment commitment by the Adani Group in the United States played a role in the American government’s decision to resolve the cases.
On 14 May 2026, the newspaper published a report titled “U.S. Set to Drop Charges Against Indian Billionaire Accused of Fraud,” claiming that US authorities moved toward dropping the case after a lawyer representing Gautam Adani made what it described as an “unusual offer” during a meeting with Justice Department officials.
According to the report, one presentation slide shown during the meeting stated that if prosecutors dropped the charges, Adani would be willing to invest $10 billion in the American economy and create 15,000 jobs. The article further stated that prosecutors later informed Adani’s legal team that the proposed investment “would play no role in the resolution of the criminal case,” although one senior Justice Department official reportedly reacted favourably to the proposal.
Indian And Foreign Media Amplify The Narrative
The narrative was rapidly amplified by multiple Indian and international media outlets. The Indian Express carried a report headlined “US set to drop charges against Gautam Adani after lawyer makes $10-bn offer: NYT Report.”
Hindustan Times similarly reported that US authorities were planning to drop the charges following Adani’s “willingness” to invest and create jobs in America.
Leftist rag The Wire also circulated the narrative that the settlement was linked to the investment proposal.
Foreign media outlets including Deutsche Welle highlighted the same angle in their coverage.
Rahul Gandhi Targets PM Modi Over Reports
The developments also triggered political reactions in India. Congress scion Rahul Gandhi, who has repeatedly used the phrase “Modani” to allege proximity between Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Gautam Adani, reacted on social media by alleging that the Prime Minister had secured a bargain for Adani’s release rather than a trade agreement.
Compromised PM ने trade deal नहीं, अडानी की रिहाई का सौदा किया।
— Rahul Gandhi (@RahulGandhi) May 15, 2026
Adani’s Legal Team Presented Jurisdictional Defence
However, documents released by the SEC and details contained within the New York Times report itself indicate that the investment commitment was not a newly proposed deal made in exchange for settlement.
In April 2026, a legal team led by prominent American lawyer Robert J. Giuffra Jr. met officials at the Department of Justice headquarters in Washington.
During the meeting, Giuffra reportedly delivered a 100-slide presentation arguing that prosecutors lacked sufficient evidence, that the United States lacked jurisdiction because the alleged conduct occurred entirely in India, that the bonds involved were not listed on US exchanges, and that investors had been repaid in full.
One of the presentation slides referenced a previously announced Adani Group investment plan in the United States valued at $10 billion and projected to create approximately 15,000 jobs.
$10 Billion Investment Was Publicly Announced In 2024
That pledge had already been publicly announced months earlier.
On 13 November 2024, shortly after Donald Trump won the US presidential election, Gautam Adani posted on X congratulating Trump and stating that the Adani Group intended to invest $10 billion in US energy security and resilient infrastructure projects.
The New York Times itself acknowledged that the investment commitment was not new and merely echoed the earlier public pledge made after Trump’s election victory.
The newspaper also acknowledged that prosecutors explicitly informed Giuffra that the investment proposal would have no bearing on the criminal case resolution.
Despite this, the report framed the investment discussion as a key turning point in the decision to resolve the proceedings, creating the impression that the settlement emerged because of the investment offer.
SEC Says Adanis Neither Admitted Nor Denied Allegations
The SEC’s own statement did not indicate that the settlement was tied to any investment commitment.
On 14 May, the Commission stated that it had moved for entry of final judgments by consent against Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani in connection with allegations that they made false and misleading statements linked to a 2021 bond offering by Adani Green Energy Ltd.
The SEC stated that both men neither admitted nor denied the allegations while consenting to proposed final judgments subject to court approval.
According to the SEC, the proposed judgments would permanently restrain the two from violating Section 17(a) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 along with Rule 10b-5.
If approved by the court, Gautam Adani would pay a civil monetary penalty of $6 million while Sagar Adani would pay $12 million.
The SEC statement specifically noted that the proposed settlement was entered into “without admitting or denying the allegations in the complaint.”
Adanis Had Challenged SEC Lawsuit In Federal Court
The development came after the Adanis challenged the SEC’s lawsuit in federal court in Brooklyn earlier this year and sought dismissal of the case.
Their filings argued that the matter improperly attempted to apply US law extraterritorially because the defendants were Indian nationals, the securities were not traded in the United States, and the alleged conduct occurred entirely within India.
Background Of The Criminal Charges Against Adani
The criminal and civil cases originated from an indictment unsealed on 20 November 2024 in federal court in Brooklyn.
US prosecutors alleged that Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, Adani Green Energy executive Vneet Jaain and others orchestrated a scheme involving more than $250 million in alleged bribes to Indian government officials to secure solar energy supply contracts projected to generate billions in profits.
American authorities further alleged that the defendants concealed the alleged bribery scheme from investors while raising more than $3 billion in capital from international and US investors, leading to charges under securities fraud laws, wire fraud statutes and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act.
The Adani Group repeatedly denied the allegations, describing them as baseless and maintaining that American authorities lacked jurisdiction over the matter.
None of the defendants appeared physically before a US court, as all remained in India, making extradition proceedings difficult under the US-India extradition treaty.
The charges had originally been brought under the supervision of former Eastern District of New York US Attorney Breon Peace.
NYT’s Framing Fuels Political Controversy
The latest move by the Department of Justice and SEC came roughly a month after a federal judge granted the defendants’ request for a pre-motion conference as part of their effort to dismiss the SEC lawsuit.
In their submissions before the court, the Adanis argued that there were no plausible allegations directly linking Gautam Adani to the drafting, approval or review of the alleged misstatements cited in the complaint.
The New York Times report additionally described the April meeting at the Justice Department as a “previously unreported meeting,” a framing that critics argue created an impression of secrecy and an attempt to secure a private backdoor arrangement.
The sequence of events, however, indicates that the $10 billion US investment pledge had already been publicly announced in November 2024 and was later cited by Adani’s legal team during a broader legal presentation focused primarily on jurisdictional and evidentiary arguments.
Prosecutors themselves reportedly clarified during the meeting that the investment pledge would not influence the resolution of the criminal proceedings.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
