During the hearing of a public interest litigation seeking formal guidelines to prevent possible misuse of Artificial Intelligence within the judicial system, Chief Justice of India Surya Kant emphasized that judges are already exercising great caution in deploying AI-based tools.
The matter was taken up by a Bench comprising CJI Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, in a plea urging regulation of what was described as the “unrestricted” use of generative AI in court proceedings. Refuting the claim of unregulated reliance on AI, the CJI clarified that the judiciary is mindful of both the scope and the risks associated with emerging technologies.
“There is no question of unregulated use by us. We use AI with utmost care. We do not want technology to overshadow judicial discretion, and we have repeatedly reiterated this,” the CJI observed.
Senior Advocate Anupam Lal Das, representing the petitioner, submitted that fabricated or AI-generated case references have reportedly been cited before courts, indicating the need for safeguards. In response, the CJI remarked that such false precedents could only surface because someone must have attempted to rely on them in the first place, reminding the Bar that lawyers share equal responsibility in preventing technological misuse.
The counsel further referred to the Apex Court’s white paper on AI and the recent policy released by the Kerala High Court outlining principles for responsible AI deployment in the subordinate judiciary. The CJI noted awareness of the developments and stated that framing such policies demands wider institutional consultation rather than impulsive adoption.
On the Court’s suggestion that recommendations may instead be placed before the administrative side, the petitioner chose to withdraw the PIL while reserving the right to submit constructive proposals to the Court outside judicial proceedings. The Bench accordingly disposed of the matter as withdrawn.
As recorded, “Petitioner, through learned Senior Counsel, seeks to withdraw the petition, with liberty to place suggestions before the Court administratively. Permission granted. Petition stands dismissed as withdrawn.”
Picture Source :
