Chief Justice of India Surya Kant has stressed that technology should act as an aid, not a substitute, in judicial proceedings and urged judiciary officials to adopt artificial intelligence judiciously, according to a report in the Press Trust of India.
Speaking at the 22nd biennial state-level Judiciary Conference titled ‘Rethinking Judiciary in the Age of Artificial Intelligence’ organized by the Karnataka Judicial Officers Association, the CJI said the integration of AI needs to be guided by a balanced approach that increases efficiency while retaining human intelligence, experience and constitutional conscience at the heart of the judiciary.
He explained that judicial staff should not be afraid to deploy AI tools, saying that complex cases already require deeper thinking, greater patience and careful reasoning, and the same diligence will be applied when using such technology to ensure that judicial independence is not compromised.
The event was attended by Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah, Supreme Court Justices BV Nagaratna and Aravind Kumar, Karnataka High Court Chief Justice Vibhu Bakru and others.
The CJI highlighted that AI poses both opportunities and challenges for the judiciary. On the other hand, it improves efficiency by supporting legal research, streamlining case management, organizing large amounts of data, and reducing administrative burden, thereby allowing judges to focus more on sentencing. He added that with structured training, judicial officers can effectively utilize these tools and increase productivity.
At the same time, he warned that because AI systems operate based on patterns, algorithms, and existing data sets, they lack human judgment and the ability to engage with the ethical, social, and moral aspects that underpin judicial decision-making. He said the judgment was not only analytical, but also reflective and contextual, based on constitutional values.
He warned that over-reliance on AI could reduce judicial reasoning to a mechanical process and undermine its depth, independence and integrity. He also expressed concern about inaccuracies created by these systems, such as fabricated precedents, inaccurate citations, and fictitious legal proposals, noting that such errors can mislead proceedings and undermine outcomes.
The CJI further highlighted the risk of misusing AI tools to generate misleading pleadings, frivolous allegations, or superficially persuasive but flawed submissions, adding that such actions could burden an already strained judicial system and divert attention from real cases that need urgent resolution.
He stressed that judiciary officers need to approach technology with insight rather than blind reliance, and said any material generated by AI must be independently verified and scrutinized. He added that the responsibility for ensuring accuracy, reliability and impartiality remains with the judiciary and cannot be delegated to machines.
Reaffirming that justice must remain a human endeavor, the CJI said justice is shaped by reasoning, guided by values and strengthened by experience, elements that cannot be replicated by technological systems.
He added that the future of the judiciary depends on adapting to technological change without losing its core identity, requiring continuous learning, reflection and a commitment to excellence.
Emphasizing the importance of institutional reflection, he said the judiciary is in transition and its choices will shape its trajectory for years to come, and that while tools and methods may evolve, the fundamental responsibility to provide fair, accessible and humane justice remains the same.
First publication date
