New Delhi : Former Attorney General of India and Senior Counsel Mukul Rohatgi on Wednesday said that industrialist Gautam Adani, along with his nephew Sagar Adani, has not been named in key bribery or obstruction of justice charges in the indictment filed by United States prosecutors in a bribery case.
Earlier today, the Adani Group Energy Limited (AGEL) refuted bribery allegations made by the US Department of Justice and the US Securities and Exchange Commission against the Group’s founder and Chairman Gautam Adani, his nephew Sagar Adani and MD CEO Adani Green Energy Vineet Jaain, in a filing with the stock exchanges. AGEL has cited media reports on the alleged bribery and corruption charges against Adani officials in its filing as “Incorrect”.
“……..I have gone through this indictment by the US court. I assess that there are five charges or five counts. It is important to note that counts one and five are more important than the others, but neither in Count 1 nor in Count 5 is Mr Adani or his nephew charged,” Rohtgi said.
The senior counsel clarified that these were his personal legal views. “I am not a spokesman for the Adani Group. I am a lawyer and have been appearing for the Adani Group in several cases,” he said.
“Count 1 of the indictment is against certain persons minus the two Adanis. It includes some of their officers and one foreign person…The first allegation is a conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act framed by the US Parliament. In that, the Adanis are not named, their officers may be named,” the Former Attorney General of India said.
He detailed further, “There are two or three other counts relating to securities and bonds. In those three counts, the Adanis and others are named…This is a charge sheet alleging that these people, including Adanis have bribed Indian officials in Indian entities relating to the supply and purchase of power. Still, I do not find a single name or a single detail in the chargesheet as to who has been bribed, in what manner has he been bribed and the official belongs to such and such department. This charge sheet is completely silent, so I don’t know how one can respond to this kind of chargesheets…” he said.
In a legal indictment, count refers to individual charges against a defendant.
Rohtagi stated that Adani was named under two counts that were related to security and bonds.
“It is like a chargesheet under the Indian penal laws. Count one is against certain other persons minus the two Adanis… That is the ‘Conspiracy to Violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act,’ called the ‘FCPA,’ similar to the ‘Prevention of Corruption Act’ in the Indian Parliament. So the first allegation is that there is a conspiracy to violate the FCPA framed by US Parliament. In that the Adanis are not named. Then there are two other counts related to security and bonds in which Adani and others are named. In the last count, which is a very important count relating to obstruction of justice. In that count, namely count number five, the Adanis are not named,” he added.
Rohatgi also pointed out that the chargesheet does not provide specific details about any alleged bribery and that the document does not give specifics of who had done the act or who has been bribed.
“These are my personal views. In the end I would like to say something that has been troubling me. When you look at a charge sheet, you are specific to see that so-and-so has done such an act, so-and-so has bribed certain individuals, as this is a charge sheet that alleges that these people, including Adani, have bribed Indian officials in Indian entities related to the supply and purchase of power. But I do not find a single name or details in the charge sheet as to who has been bribed and in what manner they have been bribed, and an official belongs to such and such department. This charge sheet is silent,” Rohatgi added.
The exchange filing by the AGEL states that the DoJ Indictment, which has five counts, does not have any mention of and has excluded Gautam Adani, Sagar Adani, or Vneet Jaain in Count One-”Conspiracy to Violate the FCPA’. It also does not mention these three names in Count Five “Conspiracy to Obstruct Justice.”