https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194190 The court affirmed the decision setting aside the General Court Martial proceedings due to non-compliance with the mandatory ninety-six-hour interval rule in Rule 34 of the Army Rules, 1954. The court emphasized the mandatory nature of the rule to provide accused individuals with sufficient time to prepare a defense, regardless of their plea. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. en-us Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Sep 2023 16:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194190 The court affirmed the decision setting aside the General Court Martial proceedings due to non-compliance with the mandatory ninety-six-hour interval rule in Rule 34 of the Army Rules, 1954. The court emphasized the mandatory nature of the rule to provide accused individuals with sufficient time to prepare a defense, regardless of their plea. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194190