- Framework outlines AI for research, administration, and litigant support.
- AI strictly barred from judicial decision-making or verdict determination.
- No predictive AI for risk scoring, bail, or witness credibility.
- New apex body and committees proposed to oversee AI governance.
India’s judiciary is moving towards a regulated adoption of artificial intelligence, with the Supreme Court’s draft AI framework outlining several ways lawyers, litigants and court staff may use the technology while drawing a firm line against its involvement in judicial decision-making. The draft Regulations for Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Courts, 2026, released by the Supreme Court, proposes that AI can be used for a range of support functions including legal research, document management, translations, court scheduling and assisting litigants.
However, it makes clear that AI cannot be allowed to determine verdicts, sentencing, bail eligibility or witness credibility.
The recommendations have been prepared by the Supreme Court AI Committee headed by Justice P S Narasimha. Public comments on the draft have been invited until June 20.
ALSO READ: ‘India Has More AI Startups Than the US, But We Can’t Copy the West’: Rajan Anandan At ABP’s India@2047 Conclave
How Lawyers Could Use AI Under Proposed Framework
Under the draft regulations, lawyers and other legal professionals would be able to use AI tools for legal research, accessing case laws, managing records and streamlining procedural work.
The framework also permits AI-powered assistance in court administration, including case filing support, defect scrutiny, preparation of cause lists and allocation of judicial resources. Translation of judgments and transcription of court proceedings are among the key use cases identified by the committee.
AI-based chatbots and conversational assistants may also be deployed to help litigants understand court procedures, access services and navigate judicial processes more efficiently. The draft additionally supports the use of AI-driven accessibility tools for people with disabilities or language barriers.
Anonymisation of court records is another area where AI could play a significant role, helping courts manage sensitive information while maintaining public access to judicial documents.
Strict Limits On AI In Judicial Decision-Making
Despite encouraging the use of AI for administrative and research purposes, the Supreme Court’s draft regulations prohibit the technology from influencing core judicial functions.
The framework states that AI must always “remain strictly subservient to human judgment and judicial authority”.
It further specifies that AI systems “shall not supplant or compromise the independent exercise of judicial authority by a duly appointed judicial officer” and that “the ultimate authority to determine matters of law, fact and justice shall vest exclusively in the judicial officers of the competent jurisdiction”.
Any AI-generated recommendation touching upon adjudication or sentencing would be treated only as advisory and must undergo independent judicial scrutiny.
ALSO READ: If Not AI, Then Why Did Uber Lay Off 23% Of Its HR Team?
Bail Prediction & Witness Profiling Barred
One of the strongest provisions in the draft is a ban on predictive AI systems used for risk scoring.
According to the proposal, “no AI system shall be used for risk scoring for any purpose in court processes, including the assessment of flight risk, prediction of recidivism, evaluation of bail eligibility, or determination of the credibility of parties or witnesses”.
The draft also bars courts from using “undisclosed, opaque, or unexplainable AI system” in proceedings that could affect a person’s legal rights or personal liberty.
In addition, personal data cannot be used to train or improve AI systems without approval from the appropriate authority. Any AI deployed within the judiciary would also need to comply with the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023.
New Oversight Mechanism Proposed
To regulate the use of AI across courts, the draft recommends establishing a permanent apex body under the Supreme Court. The proposed institution would oversee policy-making, governance, standards and innovation related to AI in the judiciary.
Separate AI committees are also proposed for the Supreme Court and all High Courts to supervise implementation and ensure that the technology is used responsibly.
The draft signals that while AI could become a powerful tool for lawyers, litigants and court administrators, India’s judiciary intends to keep final legal decision-making firmly in human hands.
