May artificial intelligence be used in the process of adjudication?

Yes, as an assistive tool to speed up the decision-making process — this Court has released draft Regulations for Use of Artificial Intelligence in Courts, 2026 for comments. But assistance can never be substituted for adjudication: AI may well serve as training wheels, and entrusting it with the pilot's seat would be both imprudent and dangerous.

Customs Act, 1962 — s.114 — Order-in-Original — Reliance on fake or hallucinated artificial intelligence-generated precedents — Zero tolerance — Customs Act, 1962 — s.114 — Adjudication — Fake or hallucinated AI-generated material — Held: A decision resting on fake or hallucinated artificial intelligence-generated material is no decision in the eyes of the law, and is to be set aside even if an iota of such material enters the decision-making process. (¶5) Use of artificial intelligence in adjudication — Assistive tool — Limits — Held further: Use of AI as an assistive tool cannot be denied, but assistance can never be substituted for adjudication. Order-in-Original set aside; proceedings revived. (¶6, ¶8)

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Vijay Ghanshyam Gadiya v. Union of India and another — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India