{"id":3086,"slug":"us-court-widebody-bribery","public_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/case/us-court-widebody-bribery","offence_type":"BRIBERY","case_type":"BRIBERY","state":"PUBLISHED","title":"Widebody case in a US court: AAR CORP. and Deepak Sharma admit bribing Nepali officials to win the Nepal Airlines bidding","short_description":"The Nepal Airlines widebody purchase was also prosecuted in the United States. Between 2015 and 2018 the American aviation company AAR CORP. and its executive Deepak Sharma bribed Nepal Airlines officials to win the USD 210 million contract for two Airbus A330-200 aircraft, moving about USD 2.5 million through shell companies in Hong Kong and Dubai. A Washington court sentenced Sharma to three years of probation in June 2025, and AAR CORP., which was never charged, admitted the facts and paid more than USD 55 million to the United States Treasury in December 2024. None of it went to Nepal Airlines.","authors":[{"slug":"subodh-kandel","display_name":"Subodh Kandel","name_ne":"सुबोध कँडेल","photo_url":"https://jawafdehi.org/assets/teammembers/subodh.webp","title":"Caseworker","has_public_page":true}],"case_publish_date":"2026-10-08","public_edit_history":[],"public_notes":"","thumbnail":{"src":"https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/78d06deb48f4e5d654bdfc8be02c4498e39cfb08fe54cefc8803d42d8745ae52.webp","srcset":"https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/040718c7b5f55ca12369768aa1fa4190223abad34da9c071eb5300ef32c11ba1.webp 400w, https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/9a7976ce67e4c6060fdfdae93b752545aa1db0e75d344de1eb11ab89ac156742.webp 800w, https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/78d06deb48f4e5d654bdfc8be02c4498e39cfb08fe54cefc8803d42d8745ae52.webp 1200w","width":1200,"height":675,"alt":""},"banner":{"src":"https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/c3d84081bf8cf54c4c7d1e313cd943ac31604d3a9007682ab0cb0b34cc01025d.webp","srcset":"https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/b6fde22b81618b2a7c60724a8eec06e5ed795a9de26e8e3db302d41ffee1a6d2.webp 640w, https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/986fdf786108e6e00d41ac86620c4c1bf77d3fb8389312642943487347ffc1e6.webp 1280w, https://s3.jawafdehi.org/case_uploads/c3d84081bf8cf54c4c7d1e313cd943ac31604d3a9007682ab0cb0b34cc01025d.webp 1600w","width":1600,"height":900,"alt":""},"thumbnail_image_id":429,"banner_image_id":429,"thumbnail_url":"","banner_url":"","case_start_date":"2024-06-24","case_end_date":"2025-06-30","dates":{"stages":[{"end":"2025-06-30","stage":"initial","start":"2024-06-24"}]},"status":"concluded","case_track":null,"status_override":null,"proceedings_started_on":"2024-06-24","proceedings_decided_on":"2025-06-30","appeal_verdicts":{},"appeal_parties":{},"entities":[{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/person/mr-deepak-sharma","display_name":"Mr. Deepak Sharma","entity_type":"Person","type":"accused","outcome":"convicted","notes":"President of International Supply Chain at an AAR subsidiary, November 2015 to April 2019, and the lead executive on the Nepal Airlines transaction. Pleaded guilty on 1 August 2024 to one count of conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA and was sentenced on 27 June 2025 to three years of probation, a USD 150,000 fine and forfeiture of USD 130,835. Also settled with the SEC. Separately convicted as an accomplice by the Special Court in Nepal in case 080-CR-0145.","name":{"en":"Mr. Deepak Sharma","ne":null},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/organization/government/soe/nac","display_name":"Nepal Airlines Corporation","entity_type":"Organization,GovernmentOrganization","type":"related","outcome":null,"notes":"State-owned flag carrier and the buyer of the two A330-200 aircraft. Treated in the American documents as an instrumentality of the government of Nepal, which is what made its senior staff foreign officials for the purposes of the FCPA. Its officials were the recipients of the bribery; it recovered nothing from the American proceedings.","name":{"en":"Nepal Airlines Corporation","ne":"नेपाल वायुसेवा निगम"},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/organization/german-aviation-capital-gmbm-3048f0","display_name":"German Aviation Capital GMBM","entity_type":"Organization","type":"related","outcome":null,"notes":"The German aircraft leasing and trading company in the winning consortium, called Germany Company or Consortium Party A in the American documents. Provided the financing, established the Irish special purpose vehicle, and was the counterparty to the backdated USD 8 million Project Cooperation Agreement with the middleman's Hong Kong company in May 2017.","name":{"en":"German Aviation Capital GMBM","ne":null},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/organization/hi-fly-transporte-aereos-sa-hi-fly-airli-88f6a5","display_name":"Hi Fly-Transporte Aereos SA (Hi Fly Airlines)","entity_type":"Organization","type":"related","outcome":null,"notes":"The Portuguese charter airline in the winning consortium, called Consortium Party B in the American documents. Held the right to purchase the two Airbus A330 aircraft and assigned it to the Irish special purpose vehicle. Was to provide services, spare parts and tooling under the consortium's framework agreement of 8 November 2016.","name":{"en":"Hi Fly-Transporte Aereos SA (Hi Fly Airlines)","ne":null},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/organization/hifly-x-ireland-limited-a2f371","display_name":"Hifly X Ireland Limited","entity_type":"Organization","type":"related","outcome":null,"notes":"The Irish special purpose vehicle, called Ireland SPV or Company 3 in the American documents. Bought the two aircraft from Airbus and sold them directly to Nepal Airlines. The USD 8 million agreement was transferred to it in July 2017, and it made the payments of about USD 2.5 million to the Dubai company between May and August 2018, as well as the two USD 3 million commission payments to AAR.","name":{"en":"Hifly X Ireland Limited","ne":null},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/location/country/united-states-of-america","display_name":"United States of America","entity_type":"AdministrativeArea","type":"location","outcome":null,"notes":"Where the proceedings took place: the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and the Securities and Exchange Commission. Every dollar recovered went to the United States Treasury.","name":{"en":"United States of America","ne":"संयुक्त राज्य अमेरिका"},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/usa/wood-dale-illinois-usa","display_name":"Wood Dale, Illinois, USA","entity_type":"Place","type":"location","outcome":null,"notes":"Principal executive offices of AAR CORP., the company that signed the non-prosecution agreement.","name":{"en":"Wood Dale, Illinois, USA","ne":null},"image":null},{"nes_id":"https://jawafdehi.org/entity/location/country/nepal","display_name":"Nepal","entity_type":"AdministrativeArea","type":"location","outcome":null,"notes":"Where the bribed officials served, where the tender was issued and evaluated, and where the two aircraft were delivered in 2018.","name":{"en":"Nepal","ne":"नेपाल"},"image":null}],"tags":["FCPA","Bribery","United States","Nepal Airlines","wide body","aircraft","AAR Corp","Procurement Irregularities"],"description":"### Background\n\nIn 2015 Nepal Airlines Corporation, the state-owned national carrier, decided to expand its international fleet by buying two Airbus A330-200 widebody aircraft. It published a request for proposals in September 2016, received eleven offers, and in January 2017 its board approved a bid from a consortium led by the American aviation company AAR. The two aircraft, 9N-ALY and 9N-ALZ, landed in Kathmandu in June and July 2018 at a total cost of about USD 216 million.\n\nThe purchase has since been examined by authorities in two countries, on two different questions.\n\nIn Nepal, the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority filed a corruption charge sheet against 32 people in April 2024, over the terms of the contract. It alleged that officials accepted a price escalation clause that was not in the original terms, and paid the price of a 242 tons aircraft for one certified at 230 tons, causing Nepal Airlines a loss of Rs 1,47,10,85,482.85. In December 2024 the Special Court convicted twelve people, including the then general manager and three members of the board, and acquitted twenty, including the then tourism minister. That case is recorded separately as 080-CR-0145. It did not allege that anyone was paid a bribe.\n\nIn the United States, a different question was being asked. AAR is listed on the New York Stock Exchange, which brings it under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, an American law that makes it a crime for American companies and their agents to bribe foreign officials. The Department of Justice and the Securities and Exchange Commission investigated how AAR had won the Nepal contract in the first place. What they found, and what AAR and its executive then admitted, is the subject of this case: that the tender was shaped in AAR's favour from the beginning, and that money was paid for it.\n\nThe Nepali court knew of the American case before it ruled. Its judgment of December 2024 refers to Sharma's guilty plea in Washington and directed the Commission to open a separate investigation into the bribery described there.\n\n### A) This case was resolved by admissions, not by trial\n\nThis case never went to trial and nobody contested it, so its documents have to be read differently from the charge sheets and judgments of a Nepali case.\n\nAAR CORP. was never charged with a crime. In December 2024 it signed an agreement with the United States Department of Justice under which the Department agreed not to prosecute it. In return the company admitted that a stated set of facts was true, accepted responsibility, paid a penalty and promised not to say anything in public that contradicts those facts. The agreement runs for eighteen months, and no independent compliance monitor was appointed.\n\nDeepak Sharma was charged, but by an information and not by a grand jury indictment. That is the usual route when a defendant has already agreed to plead guilty. He pleaded guilty on 1 August 2024 and signed a statement of offence at the same time, which is a written account of the facts he accepts as true. He was sentenced on 27 June 2025.\n\nThe Securities and Exchange Commission, which regulates listed companies in the United States, issued two settled orders on the same day in December 2024, one against the company and one against Sharma. These contain regulatory findings that the parties agreed to. They were not reached after a hearing.\n\nThe record in this case therefore rests on admissions and not on findings made after a contest. That is a different kind of evidence from a Nepali conviction, and in some ways a stronger one, because the people who did the acts have signed their own descriptions of them.\n\n### B) How the case moved through the American system\n\nSharma's dealings with the American prosecutors began well before any charge. He travelled voluntarily from the United Kingdom and was questioned in proffer sessions on 22, 23 and 24 January 2024 and again on 13 and 14 March 2024, five days in all. On 12 June 2024 the US Attorney's Office and the Fraud Section of the Department of Justice sent his lawyers a plea agreement letter setting out the terms on which he would plead guilty. The criminal information, the formal accusation containing one count of conspiracy to violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, was filed on 24 June 2024. On 1 August 2024 he pleaded guilty and signed the statement of offence, admitting facts that could be proved beyond reasonable doubt.\n\nThe corporate side was settled on 19 December 2024. On that day the Department of Justice and AAR CORP. signed the agreement not to prosecute, with a statement of facts attached, and the SEC issued its two orders, Release 34-101987 against AAR CORP. and Release 34-101988 against Sharma. Each contains settled findings and an order to give up profits.\n\nProsecutors filed their sentencing memorandum on 20 June 2025, asking for 40 months in prison and explaining Sharma's cooperation. On 27 June 2025 Judge Amit P. Mehta sentenced him to three years of probation, a fine of USD 150,000 and a forfeiture of USD 130,835. The judgment, which is the formal record of the conviction and sentence, followed on 30 June 2025.\n\nThe Nepali case ran alongside all of this. The Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority (CIAA) filed its charge sheet in the Special Court on 4 April 2024, after Sharma had been questioned in Washington but before he was charged there. The Special Court gave its verdict on 5 December 2024, two weeks before the American resolutions were announced.\n\n### C) What was admitted, in the order it happened\n\nEverything below comes from a document in which the person or the company accepted the facts as true. Where a fact appears in only one document, that document is named.\n\n**November 2015 — A meeting in Nepal.** Sharma attended a meeting in Nepal with the Nepali middleman and the senior Nepal Airlines official, where the possible aircraft purchase was discussed. The official suggested that Sharma engage the middleman as a lobbyist for the deal, through a company that the middleman himself would nominate.\n\n**Late 2015 — Confidence about the tender.** According to the SEC order, Sharma wrote to colleagues on 22 November 2015 that he had held a good meeting with the chief executive of Nepal Airlines and that the request for proposals would be drafted in favour of his company. In a follow up email in December he forwarded correspondence with the Managing Director and said the Managing Director was relying entirely on AAR to bid and win.\n\n**29 March 2016 — An unpublished draft is shared inside AAR.** About six months before the request for proposals was published, Sharma forwarded to two of his executives a draft of the document that was then circulating among Nepal Airlines officials. He wrote:\n\n> \"Please find attached Draft RFP. NOTE: this is not published yet and it is strictly for three of us, you and I to comment and change any terms to suit AAR. Let me know if you want any changes made to the payment terms or bid terms so that it favours AAR. I can ask these to incorporate on the RFP for publication. I am meeting with the official and Chairman this week.\"\n\n**Mid 2016 — Technical specifications added.** According to the SEC order, Sharma emailed the Managing Director with technical specifications to add to the request for proposals. He then forwarded that email inside AAR with a comment that, the way the document was going, no one other than AAR would qualify to bid.\n\n**1 September 2016 — The official proposes dates a competitor could not meet.** Shortly before publication, the official wrote to Sharma:\n\n> \"What I have in mind is that we will specify MOU signing date, purchase agreement date and delivery date in such a way that a competitor cannot meet delivery dates. Following is tentative dates, and I want your feedback as to whether you can meet delivery dates. Tentative dates, I personally fixed, but not yet shared with other NAC executives.\"\n\n**26 September 2016 — The request for proposals is published.** Nepal Airlines published the request for proposals. Sharma told colleagues inside AAR that it was \"designed for us.\"\n\n**30 October 2016 — A message from the official.** The official sent Sharma a text message:\n\n> \"No need to worry at all. Almost all higher-ups are in our pocket.\"\n\n**1 November 2016 — The Hong Kong company is engaged.** An AAR subsidiary signed a foreign representative agreement with the Hong Kong company controlled by the Nepali middleman. The commission was seven per cent of the final sale price, which internal documents estimated at between USD 9.6 million and USD 14.6 million.\n\nThe SEC order records that the company was engaged even though four warnings had been raised during due diligence. It had no aviation experience, the description of its services was vague, its two customer references were for sales of mobile phones and electronics, and the commission rate was higher than normal. An internal presentation described the arrangement as necessary in order to win.\n\n**8 and 9 November 2016 — The consortium submits its bid.** On 8 November the AAR subsidiary, the German aircraft leasing company and the Portuguese charter airline signed a framework agreement to bid jointly. The consortium submitted its bid the next day. On that same day, from Nepal, Sharma sent the German director a text message:\n\n> \"I am having dinner with head of evaluation committee now. We are discussing how to throw others out even if they come below our bid. See you tomorrow.\"\n\nThe day after, he texted an AAR executive:\n\n> \"we got the Nepal deal.\"\n\n**1, 4 and 9 December 2016 — Warning signs, and a change of arrangement.** According to the SEC order, AAR executives learned from Sharma on 1 December that the money going to the Hong Kong company would be used for donations to political parties in Nepal. On 4 December AAR received an anonymous email alleging bribery in connection with the transaction. On 9 December AAR terminated the Hong Kong company, although a separate termination and fee agreement provided that the company would still receive USD 250,000 once the two aircraft were delivered.\n\n**16 January 2017 — The board approves the bid.** Nepal Airlines informed AAR that its board had approved the consortium bid.\n\n**Early 2017 — The deal is restructured.** The transaction was reorganised. Originally the Irish special purpose company would have sold the aircraft to AAR, and AAR would have sold them on to Nepal Airlines. Under the new structure the Irish company sold directly to Nepal Airlines and AAR took a commission of USD 6 million, in place of the USD 9.6 million to USD 14.6 million first contemplated.\n\n**8 May 2017 — A backdated agreement for the middleman.** After the purchase contract had been signed, Sharma and the middleman arranged for a Project Cooperation Agreement to be signed between the German company and the Hong Kong company. Under it the Hong Kong company would be paid USD 8 million for helping prepare the bid and negotiate with Nepal Airlines.\n\nThe agreement was backdated to October 2016, before the bid was submitted. Both the statement of offence and the company's statement of facts record plainly that the Hong Kong company did not provide any such services.\n\n**10 July 2017 — The agreement moves to the Irish company.** The agreement was transferred from the German company to the Irish special purpose company, with USD 500,000 of the USD 8 million to be paid as an advance.\n\n**9 August 2017 — The first payment.** A payment of EUR 423,226, about USD 500,000, was made on behalf of the Irish company to the Hong Kong company's bank account. Sharma forwarded the wire confirmation by email to the personal email address of the Nepal Airlines official and to the middleman. Sharma understood that a portion of the payment would be used for bribes to Nepali officials, including that official.\n\n**22 October 2017 — A Dubai company is set up.** A new company was incorporated in Dubai. One of its two shareholders was the middleman's son.\n\n**January 2018 — The Hong Kong bank blocks the transfer.** The Hong Kong bank blocked the transfer, and Sharma and the middleman moved the Project Cooperation Agreement again so that the Irish company would pay the Dubai company instead. On 30 January Sharma asked the German director:\n\n> \"Do you know when is first transfer planned?\"\n\nThe reply was:\n\n> \"We will need an invoice. Ideally for a first smaller amount. To test the waters so to speak.\"\n\n**19 April to 23 May 2018 — The Dubai company's invoices and the first wire.** On 19 April Sharma sent an invoice from the Dubai company to the Irish company for USD 50,000, described as \"Service Provided for Bid and Sale of X2 A330 as an Advance.\"\n\nOn 15 May Sharma texted the German director about the middleman and the official pressing for payment:\n\n> \"the Nepali guys is chasing like hell.\"\n\nOn 17 May a second invoice followed, for USD 450,000, in the same words. On 23 May USD 50,000 was wired from the Irish company's account in Ireland, through a bank account in New Jersey, to the Dubai company's account in the United Arab Emirates.\n\n**28 June 2018 — The first aircraft arrives.** The first of the two aircraft landed in Kathmandu. The two aircraft are registered as 9N-ALY and 9N-ALZ. This date and the date of the second landing come from the Nepali case record and not from the American documents.\n\n**3 July 2018 — The second wire.** EUR 390,000, about USD 450,000, was wired to the Dubai company on the same route.\n\n**26 July 2018 — The second aircraft arrives.** The second aircraft landed in Kathmandu.\n\n**July and August 2018 — Commission paid to AAR.** After both aircraft had been delivered, the Irish company wired two commission payments of USD 3 million each to AAR's bank account in the United States.\n\n**9 and 10 August 2018 — The last invoices and wires.** The middleman sent two more invoices of USD 1 million each, and two wires of about USD 1 million each followed the next day.\n\n**2018 in total — What reached the Dubai company, and the separate USD 250,000.** Between May and August 2018 the Irish company paid the Dubai company about USD 2.5 million in connection with the transaction. Both Sharma and AAR admit that a portion of it was understood to be for bribes to Nepali officials.\n\nSeparately, in 2018, AAR paid the Hong Kong company the USD 250,000 termination commission through a United States correspondent bank and recorded it in its books as a legitimate commission expense.\n\n### D) Amounts involved in this case\n\nThe figures of money in this case are not the figures in the Nepali case, and the two should never be added together or treated as the same loss.\n\n| Amount | What it was |\n|---|---|\n| USD 210 million | Approximate value of the contract to supply the two aircraft |\n| USD 8 million | Value of the backdated sham agreement in favour of the middleman's company |\n| USD 500,000 | Attempted payment of August 2017, blocked by the Hong Kong bank |\n| USD 2.5 million | Actually paid to the Dubai company between May and August 2018 |\n| USD 250,000 | Termination commission paid to the Hong Kong company and booked as a legitimate expense |\n| USD 6 million | AAR's profit on the Nepal transaction |\n| USD 23.9 million | AAR's total admitted profits from both the Nepal and South Africa schemes |\n\n**What the company and the individual paid to settle**\n\n| Payer | Amount | To whom |\n|---|---|---|\n| AAR CORP. | USD 26,363,029 criminal penalty, a reduction of 45 per cent from the guideline figure | United States Treasury |\n| AAR CORP. | USD 18,568,713 forfeiture, credited against the SEC disgorgement | United States Treasury |\n| AAR CORP. | USD 23,451,100 disgorgement and USD 5,785,524 interest | United States Treasury |\n| Deepak Sharma | USD 184,597 disgorgement and interest, of which USD 130,835 was satisfied by the court's forfeiture order | United States Treasury and the court |\n| Deepak Sharma | USD 150,000 fine and USD 100 special assessment | The court |\n\nThe combined total across both American resolutions is about USD 55.6 million.\n\nNepal Airlines received none of it. The government's sentencing memorandum of 20 June 2025 states:\n\n> \"Restitution is not applicable in this case. There is no identifiable victim who suffered a monetary loss.\"\n\nThe American case was about the bribery, not about what Nepal Airlines paid for the aircraft, and every dollar recovered went to the United States Treasury.\n\nBy contrast, the Special Court in Kathmandu found in December 2024 that Nepal Airlines had suffered a loss of Rs 1,47,10,85,482.85 on the same purchase, arising from the price escalation clause and from paying the price of a 242 tonne aircraft for one certified at 230 tonnes. That is a Nepali finding about a different question, made under a different law.\n\n### E) The charge, the plea and the sentence\n\nSharma pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to violate the anti-bribery provisions of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, under section 371 of title 18 of the United States Code. The maximum sentence for that offence is five years.\n\nUnder the American sentencing guidelines the calculation produced a range of 108 to 135 months, well above the statutory maximum, so the effective guideline sentence became 60 months.\n\nProsecutors then applied for a reduction on the ground that Sharma had given substantial assistance. They told the court he had travelled voluntarily from the United Kingdom to the United States twice before being charged, had been questioned over five days, had given previously unknown detail about how the scheme worked, and had corroborated another cooperating witness.\n\nHis cooperation, they wrote, substantially assisted the investigation and the corporate resolution with his former employer. The company, for its part, also gave the government evidence of Sharma's own conduct.\n\nOn that basis the prosecutors recommended a sentence of 40 months in prison, together with a fine of USD 50,000 to USD 100,000.\n\nOn 27 June 2025 the court sentenced Sharma to three years of probation, with no prison term, a fine of USD 150,000 and a special assessment of USD 100, and entered a consent order of forfeiture of USD 130,835, an amount corresponding to part of his 2017 annual bonus.\n\nJudgment was entered on 30 June 2025.\n\nThe statement of reasons filed by the judge is restricted to the parties and is not public, so the court's own explanation for departing from the recommendation is not on the record we can see.\n\n### F) How this connects to the Nepali case 080-CR-0145\n\nThe American documents use labels instead of names for everyone except AAR, Sharma and Julian Aires. The SEC order describes the companies by country and function, and those descriptions correspond to companies that are named in the Nepali charge sheet and judgment.\n\n| Description in the American documents | The corresponding party in the Nepali case |\n|---|---|\n| Company 1, an aviation services company listed in New York | AAR International Inc. |\n| Germany Company, an aircraft leasing and trading company based in Germany | German Aviation Capital GMBM |\n| Consortium Party B, a Portuguese charter airline | Hi Fly Transporte Aereos SA |\n| Ireland SPV, a special purpose vehicle in Ireland managed by the German company | Hifly X Ireland Limited |\n| Deepak Sharma | Deepak Sharma, convicted as an accomplice by the Special Court |\n| Individual 1, a German citizen, director of the Irish company | Not identified. The Nepali case convicted several foreign nationals connected with these companies |\n| Nepal Official, a high level Nepal Airlines official from about 2015 to 2019 | Not named in any American document |\n| Nepal Intermediary, a Nepali citizen who controlled the Hong Kong and Dubai companies | Not named and not a defendant in the Nepali case |\n\nThe two proceedings cover the same purchase but not the same wrongdoing.\n\nNepal prosecuted the terms of the contract: the price escalation clause, the reduction in maximum take-off weight, the loss to the corporation.\n\nThe United States prosecuted the bribery that shaped the tender in the first place.\n\nThe Nepali charge sheet does not allege bribe payments; the American documents do, in detail, and with admissions.\n\nThe Special Court in Kathmandu was aware of the American case. Its judgment of 5 December 2024 refers to the plea agreement in United States v. Deepak Sharma as circumstantial evidence, notes the exchange of the draft request for proposals before publication and the emails about bribery, and directed the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority to carry out a separate investigation into the bribery revealed there. Whether that investigation was opened is not known to us.","key_allegations":["A senior official of Nepal Airlines Corporation, described in the American documents as a high level official who served there from about 2015 to 2019, sent confidential and unpublished drafts of the request for proposals to an executive of the bidding company, invited that executive to change the terms to suit his company, and proposed fixing the signing and delivery dates so that a competitor could not meet them. These facts were admitted by both the executive and his employer.","AAR CORP., through its executive Deepak Sharma, engaged a Hong Kong company controlled by a Nepali middleman on a commission of seven per cent of the sale price, terminated that arrangement after learning that the money would be used for payments in Nepal, and then allowed a backdated agreement worth USD 8 million to be put in place through its consortium partner so that the middleman would still be paid. About USD 2.5 million was paid under that arrangement between May and August 2018, a portion of which was understood to be for bribes to Nepali officials.","The payments were disguised. The agreement was backdated to before the bid, the invoices described the money as an advance for services relating to the sale of two A330 aircraft, and the Hong Kong company provided no such services. AAR recorded a USD 250,000 payment to that company as a legitimate commission expense in its own books."],"timeline":[{"date":"2015-11-01","title":"First meeting in Nepal","description":"Sharma meets the middleman and the senior official; the official proposes engaging the middleman as lobbyist. [Conduct — month only; the documents do not give a day.]"},{"date":"2016-03-29","title":"Unpublished draft of the tender document sent to the bidder","description":"Sharma circulates it internally inviting changes to suit his company. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2016-09-01","title":"Delivery dates proposed so a competitor cannot qualify","description":"Email from the senior Nepal Airlines official to Sharma. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2016-09-26","title":"Request for proposals published","description":"Sharma tells colleagues it was designed for AAR. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2016-10-30","title":"\"Almost all higher-ups are in our pocket\"","description":"Text message from the senior Nepal Airlines official to Sharma. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2016-11-01","title":"Hong Kong company engaged at seven per cent","description":"Engaged despite four due diligence warnings. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2016-11-09","title":"Bid submitted; dinner with the head of the evaluation committee","description":"Sharma texts that they are discussing how to exclude lower bidders. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2016-12-09","title":"Hong Kong company terminated","description":"After AAR learns the money would go to political donations and receives an anonymous bribery allegation. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2017-01-16","title":"Nepal Airlines confirms board approval of the consortium bid","description":"[Conduct]"},{"date":"2017-05-08","title":"Backdated USD 8 million agreement signed","description":"Backdated to October 2016, before the bid. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2017-08-09","title":"Blocked payment of about USD 500,000","description":"Wire confirmation forwarded to the official's personal email; the Hong Kong bank blocks the transfer. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2017-10-22","title":"Replacement company incorporated in Dubai","description":"The middleman's son is one of two shareholders. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2018-05-23","title":"First payment of USD 50,000 reaches Dubai","description":"Routed from Ireland through New Jersey. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2018-07-03","title":"Second payment of about USD 450,000","description":"[Conduct]"},{"date":"2018-08-10","title":"Two further payments of about USD 1 million each","description":"Total for the period about USD 2.5 million. [Conduct]"},{"date":"2018-08-31","title":"Two commissions of USD 3 million each paid to AAR","description":"After both aircraft were delivered, in July and August 2018. [Conduct — the documents give the period, not a day.]"},{"date":"2024-01-22","title":"Sharma questioned in Washington over five days","description":"Voluntary proffer sessions on 22, 23 and 24 January and 13 and 14 March 2024, before any charge. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2024-04-04","title":"CIAA files its charge sheet in Kathmandu","description":"The Nepali case, 080-CR-0145. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2024-06-24","title":"Criminal information filed in Washington","description":"One count of conspiracy to violate the FCPA. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2024-08-01","title":"Sharma pleads guilty and signs the statement of offence","description":"[Proceeding]"},{"date":"2024-12-05","title":"Special Court verdict in Kathmandu","description":"Four principals and eight foreign accomplices convicted; twenty acquitted; CIAA directed to investigate the bribery separately. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2024-12-19","title":"AAR signs a non-prosecution agreement and settles with the SEC","description":"More than USD 55 million in total. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2025-06-20","title":"Prosecutors ask for 40 months in prison","description":"Citing substantial cooperation. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2025-06-27","title":"Sharma sentenced to three years of probation","description":"Fine of USD 150,000 and forfeiture of USD 130,835. [Proceeding]"},{"date":"2025-06-30","title":"Judgment entered","description":"[Proceeding]"}],"ai_generated_sections":[],"evidence":[{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_doj/aar-corp-npa-2024","additional_details":"Primary. The facts admitted by the company. AAR CORP. accepted that the Statement of Facts at Attachment A is true, that it will not contradict it in public, and that the conduct establishes a conspiracy to violate the FCPA. This is the document that carries the corporate admission of the Nepal Airlines bribery, the USD 8 million sham Project Cooperation Agreement, the approximately USD 2,500,000 routed through the Hong Kong and Dubai companies, and the USD 26,363,029 penalty and USD 18,568,713 forfeiture. It is an admission obtained in exchange for non-prosecution, not a finding made after a contest.","material":{"display_name":"Non-Prosecution Agreement between the U.S. Department of Justice and AAR CORP., with Attachment A Statement of Facts (19 December 2024)","material_type":"agreement","urls":[{"link":"https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1381656/dl","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/aar-corp-pay-over-55m-resolve-foreign-corrupt-practices-act-investigation","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_sec/34-101987","additional_details":"Primary. Settled regulatory findings against the company, agreed to rather than litigated. Its particular value for this case is that it describes each party by country and function — the German leasing company, the Portuguese charter airline, the Irish special purpose vehicle, the Hong Kong and Dubai agents — which is what allows the anonymised labels in the criminal filings to be matched to the companies named in the Nepali charge sheet. Also the source for the four due diligence red flags and for AAR's USD 6,000,000 profit on the Nepal transaction.","material":{"display_name":"SEC Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings, In the Matter of AAR CORP., Exchange Act Release No. 34-101987 (19 December 2024)","material_type":"regulatory_order","urls":[{"link":"https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2024/34-101987.pdf","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-205","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_sec/34-101988","additional_details":"Primary. Settled regulatory findings against Deepak Sharma personally, agreed to rather than litigated. Establishes his role and dates at the AAR subsidiary, his position as lead executive on the Nepal Airlines transaction, and the monetary relief of USD 184,597. Corroborates the criminal filings from the regulatory side.","material":{"display_name":"SEC Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings, In the Matter of Deepak Sharma, Exchange Act Release No. 34-101988 (19 December 2024)","material_type":"regulatory_order","urls":[{"link":"https://www.sec.gov/files/litigation/admin/2024/34-101988.pdf","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2024-205","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_court/dcd.24-cr-00302.15","additional_details":"Primary, and the strongest document in this case. The facts admitted and signed by Sharma himself at his guilty plea, agreed as a factual basis provable beyond reasonable doubt. Source for the verbatim messages relied on throughout this case, including the pre-publication draft RFP email of 29 March 2016, the delivery-date email of 1 September 2016, the 'almost all higher-ups are in our pocket' message of 30 October 2016 sent by the senior Nepal Airlines official to Sharma, and the invoices and wires of May to August 2018.","material":{"display_name":"Statement of Offense, United States v. Deepak Sharma, No. 1:24-cr-00302-APM (D.D.C.), ECF 15, filed 1 August 2024","material_type":"court_filing","urls":[{"link":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.269943/gov.uscourts.dcd.269943.15.0.pdf","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69011554/united-states-v-sharma/","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_court/dcd.24-cr-00302.14","additional_details":"Primary. The terms of the plea rather than the facts of the offence: the statutory maximum, the guidelines calculation, the cooperation obligations and the USD 130,835 forfeiture money judgment. Read alongside the Statement of Offense, which was signed at the plea hearing seven weeks later.","material":{"display_name":"Plea Agreement, United States v. Deepak Sharma, No. 1:24-cr-00302-APM (D.D.C.), ECF 14, dated 12 June 2024","material_type":"court_filing","urls":[{"link":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.269943/gov.uscourts.dcd.269943.14.0.pdf","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69011554/united-states-v-sharma/","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_court/dcd.24-cr-00302.information","additional_details":"Primary, but an accusation only and not evidence of the facts it alleges. Its weight in this case comes from what followed it: Sharma pleaded guilty to the single count it charges and admitted the underlying facts in the Statement of Offense. Useful as the formal statement of the charge, the statutory provisions and the forfeiture allegation.","material":{"display_name":"Criminal Information, United States v. Deepak Sharma, No. 1:24-cr-00302-APM (D.D.C.), filed 24 June 2024","material_type":"court_filing","urls":[{"link":"https://www.justice.gov/criminal/media/1376081/dl","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69011554/united-states-v-sharma/","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_court/dcd.24-cr-00302.34","additional_details":"Primary. The prosecution's own account of the harm and of the cooperation, and the basis for two statements in this case that do not appear anywhere else: that the government sought 40 months' imprisonment, and that 'Restitution is not applicable in this case. There is no identifiable victim who suffered a monetary loss.' The second is the authority for saying that Nepal Airlines recovered nothing from the American proceedings.","material":{"display_name":"Government's Motion for a Downward Departure and Memorandum in Aid of Sentencing, United States v. Deepak Sharma, ECF 34, filed 20 June 2025","material_type":"court_filing","urls":[{"link":"https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.dcd.269943/gov.uscourts.dcd.269943.34.0.pdf","role":"RAW"},{"link":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69011554/united-states-v-sharma/","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}},{"material_iri":"https://jawafdehi.org/material/us_court/dcd.24-cr-00302.docket","additional_details":"Supporting. The procedural record of the case and the source for the sentencing entry of 27 June 2025, which sets out the three years' probation, the USD 150,000 fine and the USD 100 special assessment. Also records what is not available to us: the Judgment at ECF 40 and the Consent Order of Forfeiture at ECF 39, which are behind the paid PACER system, and the Statement of Reasons at ECF 41, which is restricted to counsel of record.","material":{"display_name":"Public docket, United States v. Sharma, No. 1:24-cr-00302-APM (D.D.C.)","material_type":"court_docket","urls":[{"link":"https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69011554/united-states-v-sharma/","role":"SOURCE_PAGE"}]}}],"notes":"","court_cases":[],"missing_details":"- The identity of the senior Nepal Airlines official. Every American document states that his identity is known to the prosecutors and to AAR, and every one of them withholds it. He has not been charged in the United States.\n- The identity of the Nepali middleman who controlled the Hong Kong and Dubai companies, and who received about USD 2.5 million. He was not a defendant in the Nepali case either.\n- How much of the USD 2.5 million actually reached Nepali officials. The documents say only that Sharma understood a portion of each payment was for that purpose.\n- Whether the Commission for the Investigation of Abuse of Authority acted on the Special Court's direction to investigate the bribery.\n- The court's stated reasons for imposing probation rather than the recommended prison term, which remain sealed.\n- The full text of the judgment of 30 June 2025 and the consent order of forfeiture of 27 June 2025, which are available only through the paid American court records system and which we have not yet obtained.","bigo":null,"weight":0,"versionInfo":{"action":"published","datetime":"2026-10-16T14:24:18.151552+00:00"},"created_at":"2026-09-30T21:54:36.831120+05:45","updated_at":"2026-10-16T20:09:18.183957+05:45"}