Taking exception to an Andhra Pradesh trial court relying on non-existent, AI-generated judgments, the Supreme Court has issued notice to Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Bar Council of India to find out ways to deal with the problem.
A bench of Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe also appointed senior advocate Shyam Divan to assist it in the matter.
“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 integrity of adjudicatory process,” it said in its February 27 order.
“This case assumes considerable institutional concern, not because of the decision that was taken on the merits of the case, but about the process of adjudication and determination,” the top court said.
“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 misconduct and legal consequences shall follow. It is compelling that we examine this issue in more detail,” it said.
Pending disposal of the matter before it, the bench directed the trial court not to proceed further in the case and posted the matter for hearing on March 10.
The misuse of non-existent, AI-generated judgments came to light during hearing a petition challenging a January order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on a suit for injunction.
The petitioners had challenged an Advocate-Commissioner’s report by raising certain objections. The trial court had in August last year dismissed the objections, relying on Subramani v M Natarajan (2013) 14 SCC 95, Chidambaram Pillai v. SAL Ramasamy (1071) 2 SCC 68, Lakshmi Devi v K Prabha (2006) 5 SCC 551 and Gajanan v Ramdas (2015) 6 SCC 223.
However, the petitioner challenged the trial court’s order on the ground that the verdicts relied on by the trial court were fake and non-existent.
The high court considered the objection and realised that the judgments in question were AI-generated, the top court noted.
Shocked by a non-existent judgment ‘Mercy versus Mankind’ cited in a petition, the Supreme Court had on February 17 expressed serious concern over the growing trend of some lawyers filing petitions drafted with the help of AI tools.
“We are alarmed to reflect that some lawyers have started using AI to draft petitions. It is absolutely uncalled for,” a bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant had said while hearing a PIL filed by academician Roop Rekha Verma seeking guidelines on political speeches.
On January 20, the top court had expressed serious concern over the use of fabricated and AI-generated evidence in matrimonial disputes. Driven by desire to ‘teach the other side a lesson’ at any cost, couples were increasingly misusing technology to construct cases on the basis of false allegations, it had said.
“Whenever the parties in a matrimonial dispute have differences, the preparation starts as to how to teach a lesson to the other side. Evidence is collected and, in some cases, even created, which is more often in the era of artificial intelligence. False allegations are rampant”, a bench of Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Manmohan had said, dissolving a Delhi couple’s marriage on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.
Discover more from PressNewsAgency
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.