NEW DELHI: Supreme Court’s most senior judge, Justice Vikram Nath, on Sunday said artificial intelligence could at best be a facilitator for the justice delivery system but could never replace the core task – writing judgments – which would always remain with judges.Speaking on ‘Challenges, innovations and role of AI in judicial governance’ at the Supreme Court Bar Association’s first national conference in Bengaluru, Justice Nath said, “AI can be used as a tool to augment the judicial system, but it cannot replace the judgment or judges’ minds as to what is to be decided.” Justice Nath said, “There can be no fixed data set in millions of cases dealt by courts. Take, for example, matrimonial cases, settlement of commercial cases, balancing equities – the court can understand the nuances of each case, which is factually different from the other, by reading papers and hearing the counsel. Israel Iran WarUS-Israel-Iran War News Live Updates: Iran vows tit-for-tat strike after Trump’s 48hr ultimatum, threatens to hit US-Israel energy facilityWatch: Missile strike rocks Israel’s ‘Little India’ as Iran attack injures over 40; videos show chaosOver 100 injured in Israel amid Iran’s missile attack; Netanyahu calls it ‘difficult evening in battle for future’Judges alone know how to strike a balance in family partition suits.”He added, “AI cannot decide cases involving constitutional issues. There are innumerable complexities in criminal cases – how to appreciate the evidence, when to grant bail; in the same FIR there can be 10 accused, court may grant bail to nine but deny one. AI can’t deal with all these. AI is there to help us in several aspects – collate data, categorise cases, translations etc. But the judgment will remain with judges only.”Justice Nath also commended the initiative taken by SCBA president Vikas Singh on the conference.SC judge A G Masih said, “AI is not here to replace lawyers and judges. Data-driven intelligence cannot replace human conscience. The act of the courts rests on public faith to deliver justice by carefully balancing rights and liabilities and undertaking an assessment of factual circumstances with a human heart. Feelings cannot be replicated by AI, which can facilitate judicial activities but cannot substitute them.”The judge said there seemed to be a need to institutionalise guidelines for court technology and, perhaps, create a judicial-tech oversight board to maintain and check AI tools for bias and to review an automated draft. Senior advocate Sajan Poovayya said hallucination was implicit in mankind and mankind made AI. Therefore, hallucination was also implicit in AI and it was that which made it dangerous for the judiciary as it presented case law and logic that was non-existent or imaginary, he said.Delhi HC Chief Justice D K Upadhyay brought up the use of AI-assisted judgment drafting software in countries like Brazil, Argentina, Singapore, the UK, the UAE and China. “Collectively, AI is increasingly integrated in multiple domains of judicial governance from administrative efficiency to substantive support functions, while simultaneously raising important questions about accountability, fairness and limits of automation in the judicial system,” he said.Justice Upadhyay added, “AI-manipulated images, deepfakes deployed maliciously undermine the integrity of evidence and adversely impact administration of justice. Courts may have to re-examine the traditional reliance on photographs and videos… Burden on parties to establish authenticity will increase and the judiciary would have to rely more on forensic tests of such evidence.”End of ArticleFollow Us On Social MediaVideosPakistan Tops Global Terrorism Index With Highest Death Toll, Raises Global Alarm‘Was Tortured’: Wife Of Deceased PWC Official Seeks Bhullar’s Arrest Before Post-MortemSanjay Raut Fires ‘Jhola Uthaiye’ Salvo At Narendra Modi Over inflation, Rupee CrashFirst China-Bound Russian Oil Tanker Reaches India After US Sanctions WaiverNarendra Modi Reviews Energy Security As Middle East Crisis Deepens8931 Days In Office: PM Modi Becomes Longest-Serving Head Of Govt Overtaking Pawan Kumar Chamling‘Zelenskyy Regime Core Exporter Of Instability’: Russia Reacts To NIA Arrest Of Ukrainians In India‘Selective Narrative’: 275 Ex-Officials, Judges Slam USCIRF Over ‘Disturbing’ Report On IndiaLPG Tanker ‘Pyxis Pioneer’ With Over 47,000 Tonnes Of Fuel From US Arrives At New Mangalore PortSeveral Injured In Dimona As Iranian Missile Hits Israel’s ‘Little India’; Videos Show Chaos123Photostories5 nutrient-rich vegetable peels you should never throw awayHow to make Dhaba-style Paneer Butter Masala at homeIn pics: India’s sea-based deterrent triad – INS Arihant, Arighaat & AridhamanTV friendships that defined a generation: From ‘Friends’ to ‘The Big Bang Theory,’ the bonds we never got overTOISA 2025 winner list (part 1): Mithali Raj, Shubman Gill, Harmanpreet Kaur, and more win bigConstant urge to pee but little output? A urologist explains what your body might be telling you5 factors to consider before investing in real estateTOISA 2025 celebrates India’s sporting excellence with Smriti Mandhana and Samrat Rana leading the honoursCan’t stop overthinking conversations before bed? What your brain is doing and how to break the cycleWho is Leena Nair? From Kolhapur to leading Chanel’s Rs 360 crore empire123Hot PicksIran newsGautam SinghaniaStrait of HormuzGold rate todayIncome Tax CalculatorPublic holidays March 2026Bank Holidays MarchTop TrendingBihar board result 2026Air India Boeing 77760% free seat ruleQatar LNG ExportsMojtaba KhameneiJames GraceySpring EquinoxDiesel price hike8th Pay CommissionPremium Petrol Price Hike
NEW DELHI: Supreme Court’s most senior judge, Justice Vikram Nath, on Sunday said artificial intelligence could at best be a facilitator for the justice delivery system but could never replace the core task – writing judgments – which would always remain with judges.Speaking on ‘Challenges, innovations and role of AI in judicial governance’ at the Supreme Court Bar Association’s first national conference in Bengaluru, Justice Nath said, “AI can be used as a tool to augment the judicial system, but it cannot replace the judgment or judges’ minds as to what is to be decided.” Justice Nath said, “There can be no fixed data set in millions of cases dealt by courts. Take, for example, matrimonial cases, settlement of commercial cases, balancing equities – the court can understand the nuances of each case, which is factually different from the other, by reading papers and hearing the counsel. Judges alone know how to strike a balance in family partition suits.”He added, “AI cannot decide cases involving constitutional issues. There are innumerable complexities in criminal cases – how to appreciate the evidence, when to grant bail; in the same FIR there can be 10 accused, court may grant bail to nine but deny one. AI can’t deal with all these. AI is there to help us in several aspects – collate data, categorise cases, translations etc. But the judgment will remain with judges only.“Justice Nath also commended the initiative taken by SCBA president Vikas Singh on the conference.SC judge A G Masih said, “AI is not here to replace lawyers and judges. Data-driven intelligence cannot replace human conscience. The act of the courts rests on public faith to deliver justice by carefully balancing rights and liabilities and undertaking an assessment of factual circumstances with a human heart. Feelings cannot be replicated by AI, which can facilitate judicial activities but cannot substitute them.“The judge said there seemed to be a need to institutionalise guidelines for court technology and, perhaps, create a judicial-tech oversight board to maintain and check AI tools for bias and to review an automated draft. Senior advocate Sajan Poovayya said hallucination was implicit in mankind and mankind made AI. Therefore, hallucination was also implicit in AI and it was that which made it dangerous for the judiciary as it presented case law and logic that was non-existent or imaginary, he said.Delhi HC Chief Justice D K Upadhyay brought up the use of AI-assisted judgment drafting software in countries like Brazil, Argentina, Singapore, the UK, the UAE and China. “Collectively, AI is increasingly integrated in multiple domains of judicial governance from administrative efficiency to substantive support functions, while simultaneously raising important questions about accountability, fairness and limits of automation in the judicial system,” he said.Justice Upadhyay added, “AI-manipulated images, deepfakes deployed maliciously undermine the integrity of evidence and adversely impact administration of justice. Courts may have to re-examine the traditional reliance on photographs and videos… Burden on parties to establish authenticity will increase and the judiciary would have to rely more on forensic tests of such evidence.”
