Summary: Ponnathal's request to hurry up a decade-old case was denied by Judge M. Jothiraman. The court emphasized fairness for all waiting people involved in legal matters.
Ponnathal filed a request under a section of the Constitution to push the Avinashi Subordinate Court to speed up a case from 2012. It's been dragging on for over ten years, and she claims it's causing her a lot of trouble. Her lawyer, Mr. T. Balaji, argued that it's high time for a resolution.
Judge M. Jothiraman wasn't convinced. He explained that the High Court can't just order a speedy trial without solid reasons. He mentioned a previous case, S.Baby Vs. S.Sakkubai Ammal, saying:
"Issuing orders to finish cases quickly without considering the number of cases waiting... will be unfair to many others."
The court warned against playing favorites. Picking some cases over others could make people lose trust in the system. Judge Jothiraman stressed that urgency should only be considered when there's a real need, not just because someone asked for it.
The Supreme Court also shared its opinion. In Sangram Sadashiv Suryavanshi Vs. The State of Maharashtra, they said:
"Courts should avoid setting strict deadlines for finishing cases... except in special situations."
In the end, the court decided not to set a timeline for the case. Judge Jothiraman reminded the lower court to handle its cases efficiently but fairly. The request was closed, meaning it's done and over with, without any extra costs for Ponnathal.
