New York: Legal experts suggest that the U.S. fraud case against Indian billionaire Gautam Adani may be bolstered by documentary evidence that could strengthen the prosecution’s position. However, they believe that extraditing Adani for trial in the near future remains unlikely.

Last month, federal prosecutors in Brooklyn revealed an indictment accusing Adani of bribing Indian officials to sway their decision to purchase power from Adani Green Energy, part of his Adani Group. The charges also claim that Adani misled U.S. investors by providing false reassurances regarding the company's anti-corruption measures.

Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani, and a senior executive from Adani Group face charges of securities fraud and conspiracy. Five individuals affiliated with Azure Power Global, a former U.S.-listed company, have also been charged with conspiring to breach the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). Azure Power has stated it fully cooperated with the investigation and that those charged are no longer with the company. The Adani Group has denied the allegations, calling them “baseless” and vowing to pursue all available legal avenues.

Gautam Adani has not been arrested and has made several public appearances in India, including one on December 9 at an event attended by Prime Minister Narendra Modi.

The indictment includes evidence such as "bribe notes" found on Sagar Adani’s phone and emails from Gautam Adani in which he forwarded a copy of an FBI search warrant and grand jury subpoena issued for his nephew in March 2023. Legal experts believe these electronic records may serve as vital proof that Adani and his nephew were aware they were deceiving investors by concealing an active investigation while promoting their anti-corruption efforts, despite alleged bribery.

Stephen Reynolds, a former federal prosecutor, observed that the inclusion of corroborating materials in the case strengthens the allegations. However, Paul Tuchmann, another former prosecutor, noted that Adani could argue he was not directly responsible for the misleading statements. Additionally, securing testimony from witnesses in India could prove challenging, as it would require Indian government cooperation, which may be hesitant to assist in a case that could reflect poorly on its officials, according to Mark Cohen, another ex-prosecutor.

India’s foreign ministry recently confirmed it had not received any formal request from the U.S. regarding the case, describing it as a private matter between U.S. firms and the Justice Department. The U.S. Justice Department has not commented on whether it has sought Adani’s extradition.

Both Adani and the Adani Group have emphasized that no executives have been charged with violating the FCPA. Conspiracy to violate the FCPA carries a potential sentence of up to five years, while the fraud charges against Adani and his colleagues could result in sentences of up to 20 years.

Drew Rolle, Deputy Chief of the Business and Securities Fraud Section in the Brooklyn U.S. Attorney’s office, emphasized the commitment to protecting the integrity of U.S. capital markets, citing recent successes in foreign bribery cases with U.S. ties, such as the conviction of Mozambique’s former finance minister for embezzlement under the pretense of economic development projects.

Rolle stressed that “honest companies” suffer when firms like Adani’s allegedly mislead investors. “This is not just a bribery case; it’s a major securities enforcement case,” he said. “If you're accessing our capital markets, you must follow the rules.”