The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the Bar Council of India (BCI) to frame norms governing the use of AI-generated legal material, while declaring a policy of “zero tolerance” towards citation or reliance on fake, hallucinated judicial precedents.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe issued the directions after discovering that the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had relied on several non-existent judgments and fabricated extracts apparently generated through AI while admitting insolvency proceedings against Essel Infraprojects Ltd. The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) subsequently failed to detect the errors and upheld the order.
Setting aside the decisions, the Court said the issue went beyond the facts of a single insolvency dispute and touched the integrity of the justice delivery system itself.
“It is necessary for Courts to adopt a zero-tolerance mode for producing, citing or using AI-generated precedents without verification,” the Bench held. It added that citing such judgments without verification would amount to professional misconduct by an advocate, while a judge's reliance on such material would constitute a “serious lapse.”
In one of the judgment's most striking passages, the Court compared AI hallucinations in legal research to a toxic leak.
“The production of fake, non-existent, and hallucinated material and its utilisation as precedents in law is like the release of methyl isocyanate in the province of law and justice: invisible, insidious, and catastrophic by the time anyone notices,” the Bench said.
Recognising that judicial directions alone cannot address the problem, the Court asked the BCI to constitute a committee to examine the issue and formulate guiding principles. The committee has been tasked with considering preventive measures as well as disciplinary consequences for lawyers who submit fabricated AI-generated authorities as genuine precedents.
The judgment comes amid a growing number of incidents involving AI-generated legal hallucinations in Indian courts and abroad. Last year, the Supreme Court itself was confronted with allegations that pleadings in a commercial dispute contained numerous fabricated citations generated by AI tools. Separately, the Delhi High Court allowed withdrawal of a petition after it emerged that some of the authorities cited either did not exist or contained quotations that were never part of the reported judgments.
The Court's concerns also echo earlier warnings from judges about the dangers of uncritical reliance on AI. Former Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud had cautioned in 2024 that AI "hallucinations" could generate false or misleading responses capable of causing miscarriages of justice if not subjected to robust verification.
While reaffirming that AI can assist legal research and adjudication, the Bench drew a red line around decision-making itself.
“What is significant for our decision-making is our resolve to adopt AI technology in aid of adjudication, while at the same time asserting and declaring total and absolute control over adjudication, with a human in the loop at every stage,” the Court said.
Also Read | AI Triggered A Courtroom Crisis In The US. Here's How India's Supreme Court Plans To Draw The Line
Essential Business Intelligence, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice, Daily Fuel, Gold and Silver Prices and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.
