On Monday, the Supreme Court announced that it will hear AAP leader Manish Sisodia's bail petitions related to corruption and money-laundering charges associated with the alleged Delhi excise policy scam on August 5.

The case was brought before a bench consisting of Justice BR Gavai and Justice KV Viswanathan.

Additional Solicitor General SV Raju informed the bench that although the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had submitted its response to Sisodia's plea, it had not yet been officially recorded. He also noted that the Enforcement Directorate's (ED) counter affidavit was prepared and would be filed shortly.

Raju also raised preliminary objections regarding Sisodia's pleas, stating that this was the second special leave petition contesting the same Delhi High Court order.

"The same order can't be challenged twice," the law officer said.

Sisodia had previously appealed to the Supreme Court to contest the Delhi High Court's May 21 order, which had dismissed his bail pleas. His challenge in the high court was against a trial court's April 30 order that rejected his bail applications in the two cases.

He was arrested by the CBI on February 26, 2023, for his alleged involvement in the liquor policy case, and by the ED in the money-laundering case related to the CBI FIR on March 9, 2023. Sisodia resigned from the Delhi cabinet on February 28, 2023.

During the hearing, Raju referred to the Supreme Court's June 4 order, which had declined to entertain Sisodia's bail pleas in the CBI and ED cases. However, the court had stated that Sisodia could renew his bail petitions once the ED and CBI filed their final prosecution complaint and charge sheet, respectively, in the cases involving alleged corruption and money laundering. In this context, a prosecution complaint is the ED's equivalent of a charge sheet.

"In light of the said submissions made and having regard to the fact that the period of 'six to eight' months' fixed by this court by order dated October 30, 2023, having not come to an end, it would suffice to dispose of these petitions with liberty to the petitioner to revive his prayer afresh after filing of the final complaint/charge sheet, as assured by the solicitor general," the bench had said.

On Monday, senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Sisodia, termed Raju's arguments as "absolutely shocking" and said it was very unfortunate for a prosecutor to say this.

The law officer then referred to the October 30 order of the apex court, which had denied him bail in the two cases.

While dismissing his regular bail plea, the top court had given Sisodia the liberty to approach the courts for relief if there was a change in circumstances or the trial got protracted.

During Monday's hearing, the bench observed that the period determined by the apex court in its October 30 order was over and the matter could be heard on merit.

"Let it be heard on merit. Why should we have hearing at two stages, one for interim and one for final," the bench said and posted the matter for hearing on August 5.