US SEC summons Gautam Adani, nephew Sagar in bribery case
New York (PTI): Adani group founder and chairman Gautam Adani and his nephew Sagar have been summoned to explain their stand on the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) allegation of paying USD 265 million (Rs 2,200 crore) in bribes to secure lucrative solar power contracts.
Summons have been sent to Adani's Shantivan Farm residence in Ahmedabad and his nephew Sagar's Bodakdev residence in the same city for a reply to SEC within 21 days.
"Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it)...you must serve on the plaintiff (SEC) an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure," said a November 21 notice sent through the New York Eastern District Court.
"If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court," it added.
Gautam Adani, 62, and seven other defendants, including his nephew Sagar, who is a director at the group's renewable energy unit Adani Green Energy Ltd, allegedly agreed to pay about USD 265 million in bribes to Indian government officials between approximately 2020 and 2024 to obtain lucrative solar energy supply contracts on terms that expected to yield USD 2 billion of profit over 20 years, according to an indictment unsealed in a New York court on Wednesday.
Separate from the indictment brought by the US Department of Justice, the US SEC has also charged the two and Cyril Cabanes, an executive of Azure Power Global, for "conduct arising out of a massive bribery scheme".
The ports-to-energy conglomerate has denied the allegations and said it will seek all possible legal resources.
"The Adani Group has always upheld and is steadfastly committed to maintaining the highest standards of governance, transparency and regulatory compliance across all jurisdictions of its operations. We assure our stakeholders, partners and employees that we are a law-abiding organisation fully compliant with all laws."
An indictment in the US is basically a formal written allegation originating with a prosecutor and issued by a grand jury against a party charged with a crime. A person indicted is given formal notice to reply.
That person or persons can then hire a defence lawyer to defend.
Prosecutors said the investigation started in 2022 and found the inquiry obstructed.
They also allege that the Adani Group raised USD 2 billion in loans and bonds, including from US firms, on the backs of false and misleading statements related to the firm's anti-bribery practices and policies, as well as reports of the bribery probe.
"As alleged, the defendants orchestrated an elaborate scheme to bribe Indian government officials to secure contracts worth billions of dollars and... lied about the bribery scheme as they sought to raise capital from U.S. and international investors," US Attorney Breon Peace said in a statement announcing the charges on Wednesday.
"My office is committed to rooting out corruption in the international marketplace and protecting investors from those who seek to enrich themselves at the expense of the integrity of our financial markets."
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Dileep case: Advocate representing survivor alleges Judge favoured actor
Thiruvanthapuram: A month after Malayalam film Actor Dileep was acquitted in the the case pertaining to abduction and rape of a famous Malayalam actress, Advocate T B Mini, the survivor's counsel in the case has accussed the Ernakulam Principal Sessions Court Judge Honey M Varghese of favouring Actor Dileep in her petition to the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court, reported On Manorama.
In her petition(accessed by Onmanorama), Mini has sought contempt of court proceedings against Honey Varghese alleging that the trial court judge made derisive remarks about her, including claims that she would doze off during court proceedings and was lax in handling the actress assault case.
Mini, who described the comments as false, contemptuous and defamatory, alleged in her petition that Honey Varghese had unduly favoured Dileep, the actor and producer who was the eighth accused in the case.
In the verdict delivered in December last year, Judge Honey Varghese acquitted Dileep and three other accused while sentencing six convicts to imprisonment.
The ruling drew major uproar, while Mini had refrained from making any public remarks against the judge at the time, stating only that the verdict was disappointing, now she has levelled serious allegations against the judge as the High Court is set to begin hearing the bail pleas filed by the six convicts on February 4.
Furthermore, Mini has stated in her petition that since the very first stage of the trial, the Judge Honey Varghese passed derogatory remarks against the survivor and behaved discourteously towards the prosecution, which eventually led to the resignation of two Special Public Prosecutors. According to Mini, the undue favour shown by Honey Varghese to Dileep resulted in a serious miscarriage of justice and brought disrepute to the judicial system.
She stated in the petition that it was a regular practice of Honey Varghese to pass derogatory comments about the survivor as well as the prosecution witnesses.
Mini also alleged that on several occasions, the Special Public Prosecutor was compelled to remind the judge that such conduct was in violation of the Supreme Court’s directions.
Mini also questioned the manner in which Honey Varghese conducted the inquiry into the illegal access of the memory card containing visuals of the sexual assault.
The memory card, a vital piece of evidence kept in the custody of the Sessions Court, was unlawfully accessed and tampered with, leading to a change in its hash value.
According to the report, an examination by the State Forensic Science Laboratory found that the card had been accessed on January 9, 2018, December 13, 2018, and July 19, 2021, while it was under the safe custody of different courts.
Mini stated in the petition that the memory card was illegally accessed for nearly half an hour in July 2021 while it was in the custody of the court presided over by Honey Varghese.
After the survivor approached the High Court citing a breach of privacy, the HC directed Honey Varghese to conduct an inquiry. Mini alleged that the judge carried out only a perfunctory inquiry, in violation of the High Court’s directions.
Mini has sought legal action against Honey Varghese, stating that when a lawyer is defamed in open court through false allegations, the judge is liable to face proceedings before the High Court. She noted in the petition that although she had a very limited role in the trial as the survivor’s counsel, she regularly attended the proceedings from November 2022 onward.
