Who pays for the Adani dismissal?: A weekly roundup on Constitution First & Editor’s Pick - June 2026

Last Friday, a US Federal Judge Nicholas Garauffis ordered the US Department of Justice, which is headed by the attorney general, to justify its decision to drop prosecution charges against Gautam Adani, India’s richest, and the world’s seventeenth wealthiest billionaire. This is a case that arises from a 2024 charge against Adani, and another company Azure, for bribing 2000 crore rupees to state government officials (mostly from Andhra Pradesh) to secure a contract to build a solar power plant. The DOJ was specifically involved since Adani Green Energy allegedly raised money from US investors (via bonds and other securities) without disclosing the alleged bribery.

In May 2026, after nearly nineteen months of pursuing the case, first filed under President Joe Biden, the DOJ suddenly dropped the case. Around that time, New York Times broke a story, based on anonymous sources, that Adani’s lawyer Robert Giuffra Jr (who also happens to be Trump’s personal lawyer) met DOJ officials in Washington in April, running them through a slide-show and arguing that the prosecutors lacked evidence and jurisdiction. One of those slides stated that if the DOJ dropped the charges, Adani would love to invest 10 billion dollars into the US economy, producing 15,000 jobs.

This – the possibility of a financial barter in a legal case involving high-level corruption – has become the central issue. Judge Garauffis’ order asking for more details, some experts have argued, is a very procedural requirement; in a majority of the cases where prosecution seeks withdrawal, it usually means an end to the case. But senators in the US are concerned. “The DOJ’s actions doubly undermine global efforts to combat bribery,” two senators wrote to the DOJ on June 11, “they appear to reduce accountability for the crime of bribery while also suggesting that quid-pro-quos can successfully undermine the enforcement of our laws.”

There are strong reasons why this is a very worrisome moment for India too. For one, it may close the door to explore the Indian government’s own deep complicity. Reporters’ Collective have argued that the Adani saga is not only about state government officials who were involved in the 2000 crore rupees bribe, but also about the Modi government at the centre, which planned a contorted auction. In 2019, the power ministry, renewable energy ministry and Solar Energy Corporation of India (‘SECI’) put together a strange auction to buy 6 GW of solar power, adding the criteria that they would only do so from companies that also agreed to build solar equipment manufacturing plants. The result of this strange eligibility requirement? – Very few companies, such as (coincidentally) the Adani group, fit into that qualification. Subsequently, abusing their monopoly, Adani and Azure put up very high bids (and won!). Because the bids were so high (higher than market rates), SECI kept struggling for more than a year to find state governments willing to buy power. And this was the reason, allegedly, why Adani had to literally bribe state officials to sign power purchase agreements at inflated prices. In many ways, the chain of unlawfulness in this story traces right back to the first decision taken at the central level to organise a contorted auction.

Tangentially, it was interesting to note that among those who gave legal opinion on behalf of Adani’s team, per the US court filing, is an unnamed former Chief Justice of India. Some former CJIs, currently living, have already, either directly or indirectly, denied their involvement (as per a report from The Wire), including ex CJIs B.R. Gavai, Sanjeev Khanna, N.V. Ramana, T.S. Thakur, P. Sathasivam, R.M. Lodha and G.B. Pattnaik.

The DOJ case’s fallout, thanks to strong legal representation and alleged lobbying, is disheartening for it could have been an opening to investigate and adjudicate on corruption that links to India’s systemic governance problems at the highest levels. It is also noteworthy that Adani’s gripping hold on solar energy in the country has spelled disaster for farmers and rural landowners who, for years, have been embroiled in ongoing court cases against forced acquisitions, lack of stakeholder consultations, and rapid changes in land use that have jarring environmental and social consequences. 

The trickle down damage is, to say the least, very unsettling.

Justice Chandru on Welfare Exclusion on the Basis of SIR