Connect with us

News

Indian billionaire Gautam Adani charged in US over alleged $250mn bribery scheme

Published

on

Indian billionaire Gautam Adani charged in US over alleged 0mn bribery scheme

Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

Indian billionaire Gautam Adani has been charged by federal prosecutors in New York in connection with an alleged years-long scheme to bribe Indian officials in exchange for favourable terms on solar power contracts projected to bring in more than $2bn in profit.

The 62-year-old tycoon, who chairs the multinational conglomerate Adani Group and has been a vocal supporter of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, was indicted in Brooklyn on charges including securities fraud alongside seven others, including executives of Adani energy subsidiaries and former employees of a Canadian pension fund.

His nephew Sagar Adani, who is the executive director at a renewables company founded by Gautam Adani, is also among the defendants.

Advertisement

US prosecutors said more than $250mn in bribes were paid between 2020 and 2024 to people in the Indian government as part of the scheme, which was allegedly concealed from the US banks and investors from which they raised billions of dollars.

They claimed that Gautam Adani met with an Indian official to “advance” the scheme.

The US attorney’s office in Brooklyn also charged three former employees of large Canadian pension fund CDPQ in connection with the alleged scheme, saying they obstructed an investigation into the bribes by deleting emails and agreeing to provide false information to the US government. CDPQ, which invests in infrastructure projects, is a shareholder in Adani companies.

The indictments threaten to reignite a reputational crisis for Adani Group, which has been trying to move past claims of accounting fraud and stock market manipulation made last year by US short seller Hindenburg Research.

“This indictment alleges schemes to pay over $250 million in bribes to Indian government officials,” US deputy assistant attorney-general Lisa Miller said. “These offences were allegedly committed by senior executives and directors to obtain and finance massive state energy supply contracts through corruption and fraud at the expense of US investors.”

Advertisement

Prosecutors further alleged that the defendants “extensively documented their corrupt efforts” on mobile phones, on PowerPoint presentations and in Excel spreadsheets “that summarised various options for paying and concealing bribe payments”.

In a parallel civil lawsuit, the US Securities and Exchange Commission said the alleged bribes were paid in order to “secure [the Indian government’s] commitment to purchase energy at above-market rates that would benefit Adani Green and Azure Power”, two renewable energy companies in India.

Adani Green, which is building one of the largest solar plants in the world at Khavda in India’s western state of Gujarat, raised more than $175mn from US investors as part of a $750mn corporate bond while the scheme was ongoing, US regulators said.

Gautam Adani and Sagar Adani allegedly “induced US investors to buy Adani Green bonds through an offering process that misrepresented not only that Adani Green had a robust anti-bribery compliance programme but also that the company’s senior management had not and would not pay or promise to pay bribes”, said Sanjay Wadhwa, acting director at the SEC’s enforcement division. 

According to the regulator’s complaint, Sagar Adani allegedly told Azure executives and others about “incentives”, or bribes, he had been proposing to “motivate” state officials to agree contracts with the Indian government’s arm responsible for implementing renewable energy programmes.

Advertisement

Adani and Azure did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

In a statement, CDPQ said: “CDPQ is aware of charges filed in the US against certain former employees. Those employees were all terminated in 2023 and CDPQ is co-operating with US authorities. In light of the pending cases, we have no further comment at this time.”

The Indian group’s founder has over the past two decades built Adani into one of India’s most formidable industrial groups, diversifying from its core ports and trading business into mining, airports, coal and renewable power.

Outside India it has built or bid for power, port and other infrastructure projects in several countries, including Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, and Israel, where it operates the port of Haifa.

In a post on X congratulating Donald Trump on his US election victory earlier this month, Adani said his group was “committed to leveraging its global expertise” and would invest $10bn in American energy security and infrastructure projects as part of the partnership between India and the US, with the aim of creating up to 15,000 jobs.

Advertisement

Adani’s rise in business, first in Gujarat then nationally, has coincided with the Indian state’s drive to harness private-sector expertise and capital to develop neglected transport and other infrastructure, which has accelerated during Modi’s decade in power.

As shares of his listed companies rose, in 2022 Adani briefly overtook rival billionaire Mukesh Ambani to become Asia’s richest man. 

The Indian National Congress party’s Rahul Gandhi, who became India’s opposition leader after this year’s general election, called for an investigation after the Hindenburg allegations and questioned Adani’s record of winning government tenders, as well as his close ties with ruling politicians including Modi, who is also from Gujarat.

The Adani Group dismissed the Hindenburg report as an “attack on India” and has repeatedly denied wrongdoing. His companies’ share prices have since rebounded.

Advertisement

News

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Published

on

Trump claims US stockpiles mean wars can be fought ‘forever’; Kristi Noem testifies before Congress – US politics live

Trump says US stockpiles mean “wars can be fought ‘forever’”

In a late night post on Truth Social, Donald Trump said that the US munitions stockpiles “at the medium and upper medium grade, never been higher or better”.

He added that the US has a “virtually unlimited supply of these weapons”, meaning that “wars can be fought ‘forever’”.

This comes after Trump said that the US-Israel war on Iran could go beyond the four-five weeks that the administration initially predicted. The president also did not rule out the possibility of US boots on the ground in Iran during an interview with the New York Post on Monday.

Advertisement

“I rebuilt the military in my first term, and continue to do so. The United States is stocked, and ready to WIN, BIG!!!,” he wrote.

Share

Key events

During his opening remarks, Senate judicicary committee chairman, Chuck Grassley, blamed Democrats for the ongoing shutdown Department of Homeland Security (DHS) but highlighted four agencies: the Secret Service, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), the Transportation Security Administration (TSA), and the Coast Guard.

Democrats are demanding tighter guardrails for federal immigration enforcement, but a sweeping tax bill signed into law last year conferred $75bn for Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), which means the agency is still functional amid the wider department shuttering.

Share
Continue Reading

News

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

Published

on

Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP

The Supreme Court

Win McNamee/Getty Images


hide caption

toggle caption

Advertisement

Win McNamee/Getty Images

The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.    
  
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.  
  
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.  
  
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.   
 
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits. 
  
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices  summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.” 
 
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced. 
 
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor  said that  if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.” 

Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.  
  
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow.  Earlier last month  the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map.  California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.     
   
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district.  Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.    
     
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?    
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.   

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Published

on

Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California

Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown.  All times on the map are Pacific time. The New York Times

A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.

The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.

As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.

Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending