The Bombay High Court has dismissed an application filed by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI) challenging the bail granted to businessman Rajesh Tulsidas Nakhua, observing that the remedy sought by the agency was beyond the scope of powers under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
The bench of Justice Amit Borkar, who clarified that while the DRI may have legitimate concerns about the manner in which bail was granted, such grievances cannot be addressed through the current proceedings.
The DRI had argued that the lower court, while granting bail to Nakhua, relied on extraneous and irrelevant material and failed to consider evidence crucial to the case. The agency claimed that this undermined the integrity of the bail decision and therefore warranted judicial interference.
However, the High Court relied on established legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Rashmi Rekha Thatoi v. State of Orissa (2012), Bay Berry Apartments (P) Ltd. v. Shobha (2006), and U.P. State Brassware Corpn. Ltd. v. Uday Narain Pandey (2006). These rulings collectively emphasize that a court must act strictly within the powers conferred by statute and cannot indirectly assume jurisdiction not expressly granted.
The court held that Section 439 CrPC only empowers a court to consider bail applications on their own merits. It does not allow the High Court to conduct a judicial review of another court’s bail order. If the DRI wishes to contest the legality of the bail order, it must pursue remedies before the appropriate forum, following the correct legal procedure.
“While the applicant may have legitimate grievances about the manner in which the bail was granted, those grievances cannot be addressed in the present proceedings under Section 439 Cr.P.C. The proper remedy would be to initiate proceedings before the competent court or forum,” the order read.
The High Court therefore disposed of the DRI’s application, keeping all questions open for the agency to raise in appropriate proceedings, but refrained from entering into the merits of the allegations.
Case Details
Case Title: DRI Versus Rajesh Tulsidas Nakhua
Case No.: Criminal Application No.185 Of 2024
Date: 25/09/2025
Counsel For Petitioner: Ruju Thakker
Counsel For Respondent: Dr. Sujay Kantawala
