Use of artificial intelligence in the Supreme Court

Transcript:

Once your case is admitted in the Supreme Court, what decides when it gets heard?

The Registry of the Supreme Court of India has long been described as a black hole. It is where cases go to wait their turn.

Now, the Court is exploring the use of artificial intelligence to manage the cause list. Automated systems promise order, consistency and transparency.

But listing is not merely a matter of logistics.

Advocate on Record Mahfooz A. Nazki says this is not a structural change. AI would only enhance the existing system, assisting with administrative sequencing.

The difficulty, however, becomes sharper when the focus shifts from sorting to prioritisation. Advocate on Record Malak Bhatt points out that automated systems can classify cases using objective markers, but are not equipped to deal with context and legal judgment.

Matters involving vulnerable litigants could be deprioritised, particularly where cases lack detailed documentation.

Justice S. Muralidhar, former Chief Justice of the Orissa High Court draws a firm line. AI should not be used as a thinking tool. He says: “Tasks that depend on case-specific considerations require constant verification.”

These concerns are no longer theoretical. Recently, the Supreme Court had to intervene after fabricated precedents generated through AI made their way into a case.

There is also a structural dilemma. The choice between relying on large commercial AI systems for capacity and speed, and developing domestic alternatives to ensure confidentiality and local storage. Questions of privacy and control over judicial information remain unresolved. Across these views, there is a clear commonality. AI may assist the system, but it cannot replace the function of the Court.

Visit www.scobserver.in to read the complete analysis!