The Supreme Court's Draft Regulations on Use of Artificial Intelligence in Courts may be one of the most significant legaltech developments in India in recent years.
What stood out to me is that the Supreme Court has neither embraced AI blindly nor resisted it. Instead, it has attempted to create a framework where innovation and accountability coexist. Some key takeaways:
๐๐ ๐ถ๐ ๐๐ฒ๐น๐ฐ๐ผ๐บ๐ฒ ๐ถ๐ป ๐ฐ๐ผ๐๐ฟ๐๐ ๐ฏ๐๐ ๐ผ๐ป๐น๐ ๐ฎ๐ ๐ฎ๐ป ๐ฎ๐๐๐ถ๐๐๐ฎ๐ป๐
AI may be used for legal research, citation verification, drafting assistance, translation, transcription, case management, scheduling, record management, accessibility tools and even AI-powered litigant assistance.
๐๐๐ฑ๐ด๐ฒ๐ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฎ๐ถ๐ป ๐ถ๐ฟ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฝ๐น๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐ฏ๐น๐ฒ
The regulations clearly state that AI cannot decide cases, determine judicial outcomes, pass sentences, assess witness credibility, decide bail, predict criminal behaviour or interfere with judicial deliberations.
Questions of law, fact and justice must remain exclusively with human judges.
๐ง๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐ ๐ถ๐ ๐ป๐ผ๐ ๐บ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ๐ฎ๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐
Under Regulation 43(3), if AI is used to prepare pleadings, documents, submissions or evidence, its use must be disclosed to the court.
Further, Regulation 43(4) allows courts to seek details regarding the AI system used, the extent of AI assistance and the verification measures adopted.
Most importantly, Regulation 43(6) makes it clear that lawyers and litigants remain fully responsible for any false, fabricated, misleading or inaccurate AI-generated content. "The AI did it" will not be a defence.
๐ฆ๐๐ฝ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐บ๐ฒ ๐๐ผ๐๐ฟ๐ ๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ผ๐ณ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ธ๐ป๐ผ๐๐น๐ฒ๐ฑ๐ด๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ ๐ต๐ฎ๐น๐น๐๐ฐ๐ถ๐ป๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐
The regulations specifically recognise that AI can generate convincing but incorrect information, including fictitious case laws and inaccurate legal references, making human verification essential.
๐๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ป๐ฎ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ถ๐๐ฒ๐ ๐ฎ๐ ๐บ๐๐ฐ๐ต ๐ฎ๐๐๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฎ๐ ๐๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ต๐ป๐ผ๐น๐ผ๐ด๐
The framework proposes AI Committees, AI Secretariats, annual audits, AI registers, incident-reporting mechanisms, an AI Content Verification Authority and a Centre of Research and Excellence on AI.
๐๐ฎ๐๐ฎ ๐ฝ๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฐ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฐ๐๐ฏ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐ฒ๐ฐ๐๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ป๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐น ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ป๐
Judicial data cannot be freely used for AI training and private AI vendors will be subject to strict approval, audit, and compliance requirements.
Perhaps the most interesting aspect is that the regulations create a "presumption in favour of responsible AI adoption." Courts are encouraged to explore AI where it improves efficiency, reduces delays and enhances access to justice.
The message is simple from SC that AI may help deliver justice faster. But justice itself must remain human.