The Supreme Court on Thursday raised serious concerns over the use of Artificial Intelligence in legal proceedings after discovering that an NCLT judgment had relied on fake and non-existent case citations generated through AI.
A Bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Alok Aradhe set aside an NCLT order related to Essel Infraprojects insolvency proceedings after finding that the judgment had referred to fabricated precedents and hallucinated citations, per a report by News18.
‘Zero-tolerance’ approach
The Bench stressed that courts must adopt a strict approach against the use of unverified AI-generated material in legal proceedings.
Also Read | Supreme Court calls homemakers ‘nation builders’, values their work at ₹30,000 a month
“It is necessary for Courts to adopt a zero-tolerance mode for producing, citing or using AI-generated precedents without verification. It is a misconduct on the part of an advocate to cite such judgments without verification. Equally, it is a serious lapse if a judge relies on such a fake or hallucinated AI-generated material as precedents in support of the determination,” the Bench was quoted as saying by News18.
The court further observed that judgments influenced by such material cannot be accepted in law.
“Such decisions are to be set aside even if an iota of fake or hallucinated material enters the decision-making process, as it would violate the sanctity of adjudication. It is absolutely necessary to maintain integrity in decision making, and we reiterate and declare zero tolerance for the Bar as well as the Bench to cite, refer to, or rely on such material,” the Court said.
Court clarifies position on AI
The Bench clarified that its observations should not be interpreted as opposition to Artificial Intelligence itself.
“It is also clarified that our judgment shall have no bearing on the rightful use of AI, but on the presentation or reliance on fake or hallucinated material as if it were a court precedent,” the Bench was quoted as saying by News18.
Questions over appellate scrutiny
The Supreme Court also questioned how the fake citations escaped scrutiny at the appellate stage.
Also Read | ‘Physical relationship between consenting adults’ no ground to judge character: Supreme Court
“What about the Appellate Tribunal? The fake, non-existent judgments escaped scrutiny by the first statutory appellate tribunal. Today’s courts and tribunals implicitly trust lawyers when referring to precedents cited before them. Imagine the hardship of a situation in which the Court must verify the authenticity of each judgment cited by an advocate,” the Court observed.
The Bench held that a decision based on fabricated material is “no decision at all” and described it as a “subversion of the rule of law”.
FAQs:
Why did the Supreme Court warn against AI-generated citations?
The court found that an NCLT judgment relied on fake and non-existent AI-generated precedents.
Did the Supreme Court oppose the use of AI entirely?
No, the court said its ruling does not affect the rightful use of AI technology.
