AI in the dock: India Supreme Court warns of misconduct

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday cautioned that judicial orders founded on artificial intelligence-generated, non-existent rulings would constitute misconduct — not merely a judicial error — raising serious concerns over the use of AI tools in court proceedings.

A bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe said the issue warranted closer scrutiny and issued notice to Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and the Bar Council of India, PTI reported. Senior advocate Shyam Divan has been appointed to assist the court.

“We take cognisance of the trial court deploying AI-generated non-existing, fake or synthetic alleged judgments and seek to examine its consequences and accountability as it has a direct bearing on the integrity of the adjudicatory process,” the bench said in its February 27 order.

“At the outset, we must declare that a decision based on such non-existent and fake alleged judgments is not an error in the decision making. It would be a misconduct and legal consequences shall follow. It is compelling that we examine this issue in more detail,” it added, according to PTI.

The matter surfaced during the hearing of a plea challenging a January order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in a suit seeking an injunction. The apex court observed that a trial court had relied on certain judgments while rejecting objections to an advocate-commissioner’s report. The petitioners argued that the cited rulings were non-existent and generated through AI.

The high court acknowledged that the judgments referred to were AI-generated and issued a caution. However, it proceeded to decide the case on merits and dismissed the civil revision petition, prompting the petitioners to approach the Supreme Court.

While issuing notice, the apex court directed that until the special leave petition is decided, the trial court “shall not proceed on the basis of the advocate-commissioner’s report,” and listed the matter for hearing on March 10.

In a separate proceeding on February 17, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant voiced similar concerns over lawyers submitting petitions drafted with AI tools that cited non-existent cases, including “Mercy vs Mankind,” during the hearing of a public interest litigation seeking guidelines on political speeches.