The Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to grant an urgent hearing on a plea filed by businessman Amandeep Singh Dhall, who has challenged the Delhi High Court's verdict denying him bail in a corruption case linked to the alleged excise policy scam.

A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan declined the request of senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for Dhall, who mentioned the matter for early hearing of the plea.

"We have to think about poor litigants also. We cannot just bypass procedure of the Supreme Court," the bench said. At the outset, Singhvi said Dhall has been in custody for a long period.

"He got regular bail in the money laundering case filed by the Enforcement Directorate case. The findings in a more stringent Prevention of Money Laundering Act case in my favour. I am also seeking interim bail," Singhvi said.

The top court said it will take up the matter in October second week.

The apex court had on September 17 issued notice to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seeking its reply on Dhall's plea and posted the matter for hearing in November.

Dhall has moved the apex court challenging the high court's June 4 verdict which refused to grant him bail in the case.

He was arrested by the CBI in April last year in connection with the case.

Dhall is an accused in separate cases linked to the alleged scam being probed by the CBI and the Enforcement Directorate (ED).

According to the probe agencies, Dhall allegedly conspired with other accused and was "actively" involved in the formulation of the liquor policy and facilitating kickbacks to the AAP and its recoupment by the "South Group" through various means.

According to the CBI and the ED, irregularities were committed while modifying the excise policy and undue favours extended to licence holders.

The Delhi government implemented the policy on November 17, 2021 and scrapped it at the end of September 2022 amid allegations of corruption.

In its June 4 verdict, the high court had dismissed Dhall's bail application in the corruption case saying that allegations against him were serious in nature.

The high court had noted since many of the witnesses in this case are known to Dhall and he was also in contact with "influential leaders" of the Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) in the Delhi government for "hatching" a conspiracy, he does not satisfy the triple test for grant of bail.

"Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case...when charges are yet to be framed and evidence is yet to be recorded, and the fact that an FIR already stands registered against the applicant for paying bribe to an officer of Directorate of Enforcement for getting his name removed from the present case, this court does not find any ground for grant of bail to the applicant, at this stage," the high court had said.

Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by The Telegraph Online staff and has been published from a syndicated feed.