Title: Shielding Adani: On the U.S. indictment, the Indian government’s stand
It will be a matter of everlasting shame if there is no domestic investigation by Indian agencies into allegations by the U.S. Department of Justice that billionaire businessman Gautam Adani and his associates offered bribes to officials in more than one State. Federal prosecutors have filed their indictment based on perceived violations of U.S. laws that prohibit corrupt transactions with foreign entities. India will have to order its own probe in terms of domestic anti-corruption law. So far, especially following revelations by Hindenburg Research, a U.S.-based short-seller, the Modi regime has shown a marked reluctance to countenance the idea of any wrongdoing by the Adani Group. The BJP has been putting up a stout defence of the group as though its political interests are inseparable from Mr. Adani’s corporate interests. The Union government has so far remained impervious to entreaties from the Opposition for a joint parliamentary committee probe into the allegations, which range from manipulation of share prices, non-disclosure of related party transactions, round-tripping of funds and even regulatory capture. Sporadic and possibly perfunctory probes by some agencies have yielded little by way of action. However, the Supreme Court of India found the outcome of investigations by the market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Board of India, credible enough to reject a demand for handing the Adani probe to an independent agency.
Several State governments, most notably Andhra Pradesh, have now been named in the overseas indictment pertaining to the supply of solar power from Adani Green and Azure Power Global Ltd., the companies at the centre of the storm. The alleged amount offered as bribes amounted to ₹2,029 crore ($265 million), of which ₹1,750 crore was meant for a ‘foreign official’ in Andhra Pradesh. The YSR Congress Party, which was in power in A.P. at the relevant time, and the Tamil Nadu government, have denied any link with the Adani Group, maintaining that their deals were with the SECI. The indictment, however, talks of internal messages among the defendants about how “the discoms are being motivated”. Instead of taking potshots at the non-BJP parties that ran these State governments at the relevant time, the Centre should shed its reluctance to investigate the Adani Group. The fortunes of Mr. Adani, counted as one of the world’s richest, may now see a steep spiral, as not only have shares of his companies crashed but also countries that have entered investments from his conglomerate may turn their backs on him. However, this is not an issue about one tycoon suffering a setback due to developments beyond the control of his political patrons. It is about how far a government can be seen as shielding an individual.
Meaning of the word:
| Word | Meaning | Synonyms | Antonyms |
| perceived | Its refers to the interpretation or understanding that an individual or group gives to something based on their personal experiences. | Viewed Seen Recognized Observed | Ignored Overlooked Missed Unnoticed |
| prohibit | It is often used in legal, official, or authoritative contexts to indicate a restriction or ban on an action, behavior, or practice. | Forbid Ban Exclude Restrict | Allow Permit Enable Authorize |
| impervious | It means not affected or influenced by something, or not allowing something to pass through. | Impenetrable Insensitive Unaffected Resistant | Permeable Vulnerable Sensitive Affected |
