Supreme Court flags trial court use of AI-generated fake judgments in property dispute
A trial court in Andhra Pradesh relied on AI-generated fabricated Supreme Court judgments to decide a property dispute, prompting the Supreme Court of India to open an investigation into the conduct. The Supreme Court declared that such reliance on fake AI-generated judgments constitutes misconduct and poses a direct threat to judicial integrity, issuing notices to examine accountability.
What happened
A trial court in Andhra Pradesh relied on AI-generated "non-existent and fake" Supreme Court judgments while deciding a civil property dispute involving a suit for injunction. The petitioners in the case objected to an Advocate Commissioner's report, and the trial court rejected their objections by citing several Supreme Court precedents that the petitioners later discovered were fabricated by AI. The Andhra Pradesh High Court noted that the cited decisions were AI-generated and issued a word of caution, but proceeded to dismiss the civil revision petition on the merits.
Reported impact
The Supreme Court expressed serious institutional concern that the trial court's reliance on AI-generated fake judgments has a direct bearing on the integrity of the adjudicatory process. The bench stated that such conduct may constitute misconduct, not merely an error, and raises considerable institutional concern about the process of adjudication and determination itself.
Index analysis
The incident illustrates how AI systems can generate fabricated legal citations that appear authoritative, creating a risk that courts may unknowingly base decisions on non-existent precedents. This failure undermines judicial integrity and confidence in the decision-making process when false authorities are invoked to support rulings.
Governance controls
The Supreme Court issued notices to the Attorney General, Solicitor General, and Bar Council of India to examine the consequences and accountability for the trial court's conduct. The matter was adjourned to March 10, with the trial court directed not to proceed based on the disputed report in the interim.
Classification
Sources and evidence
This record was researched and written by the Index, based on the following original reporting.