On March 27, 2023, Punjab and Haryana High Court Judge Anoop Chitkara said in a lawsuit: Jasindar Singh \v. Punjab, apparently refused bail when the petitioner and accomplice violently assaulted and killed a person. The defendant also had a criminal record. Judge Chitkara said:If the crime is heinous and brutal, cruelty becomes one of the factors in granting or denying bail.”
Such rationales and orders to that effect usually do not cause surprise. However, Judge Chitkara, referring to the “jurisprudence” advocated by ChatGPT, an artificial intelligence (AI) chatbot, asked:What is the legal precedent for bail when a perpetrator commits a brutal assault?The gist of the 208-word AI response is: The chances of being released on bail in such cases are extremely low.They are a danger to the community and may be considered escape hazards” Unless the judge decides to the contrary.
In the order, the court noted that the reference to ChatGPT was “Not a representation of the merits of the lawsuit”And the trial court argued that it should not be considered! it was “Intended only to present a broader picture of bail where atrocities are a factor‘ commented the judge. However, when reading the mandate, it is clear that ChatGPT’s jurisprudence influenced judges. That is why we are discussing a less important case.
The “source” of ChatGPT Jurisprudence is unknown. Did it study legal theory or randomly mined data? Could a constitutional court deprive someone of life and liberty based on unproven jurisprudence? If you can’t rely on , why use it? Was it just an amateurish act to impress the world?
Before delving into this issue, let’s start with the basics of ChatGPT. AI software developed by Open AI in the United States. This AI chatbot can recognize patterns and develop new outputs based on that knowledge, enabling human-like conversations. The Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (GPT) is a “Large Scale Language Model” (LLM). LLM is a deep learning algorithm that can recognize, summarize, translate, predict and generate text and other content based on knowledge gained from large datasets.
of front line, Jinoy Jose P explains that since LLM is trained on a huge amount of text, the more data, the more effective the training. ChatGPT is fast due to its sophisticated algorithms and OpenAI’s huge data set. GPT-3 is trained on his 175 billion parameters. Bots can create a variety of texts such as articles, stories, scripts, marketing communications, copycat texts, and even computing code.
Despite all the hype, ChatGPT lacks human creativity and originality. It simply reorganizes the public information obtained by searching. No access to private information, information behind a paywall, or information off the web. In addition, most publicly accessible online content is unconfirmed or poorly classified, Contains false information, false facts and propaganda.
Verified information is typically proprietary and expensive. Chatbots must comply with intellectual property regulations if such data is required for training or access. Then such services will be expensive. For now, ChatGPT relies on “public” and “free” information, which is a risky proposition, especially for serious business. Additionally, the latest training data for GPT-3 is from 2021, so we are unable to answer inquiries about recent events.
Encouraged by the High Court’s order, I decided to test ChatGPT’s legal acumen and therefore asked few legal questions. ‘Should same-sex marriage be legalized in India?‘ We played it safe by declaring: ‘As an AI language model, I have no personal opinions or beliefs, but I can offer information and considerations regarding the legalization of same-sex marriage in India.Then, both sides presented arguments that are appropriate for a junior high school debate competition. Due to the September 2021 cut-off date for knowledge, no clue about the ongoing Supreme Court case on this point has been obtained. ”It will be up to Indian legislators, courts and people to decide whether to legalize same-sex marriage and how to address the issue.” concluded.
A similar approach was taken when asked:Should the Supreme Court of India allow Section 370 to be repealed?“Stay Neutral”unable to express personal opinion on political issues‘. However, some basic information was provided.
Again, he refused to give a definitive opinion on the investigation.Should the Supreme Court of India review the NJAC decision?“If you ask”What is sedition jurisprudence in India?Quite predictably, he was unaware that the Supreme Court continued to suspend laws.
Overall, I was disappointed. Basic, unoriginal and outdated answers were returned. It is primarily a combination of general web-based information. Unable to read advanced legal analysis, they may be searching Wikipedia, Quora, or random publications for answers. Nevertheless, it is interesting that I have learned to remain neutral on difficult issues.
The judgment of the Supreme Court is D. Versamy vs D. Pachchai Ammal (2010) I frowned a bit when I mentioned “”common law marriage‘ To define on Wikipedia ‘a relationship of the nature of marriage‘ Based on the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act 2005. In this case, we don’t even know the source of ChatGPT’s bail case. Therefore, her ChatGPT precedent reference of the P&H High Court was not required. The courts, which are entrusted with the honorable duty of justice, should abstain from such misfortunes which may seriously endanger someone’s life, liberty, or property.
This does not mean that law enforcement agencies do not like new AI tools that could speed up trials. CJI Judge DY Chandrachud has emphasized the importance of AI in the conduct of justice. In fact, the Supreme Court uses applications such as the Supreme Court Vidhik Anwaad Software (SUVAS), a translation tool, and the Supreme Court Portal to help streamline the court (universe) It helps us review case files, conduct legal investigations, select the most appropriate materials, and provide a speedy trial.
Bill Gates considers ChatGPT to be the most “revolutionary” technology of the last half century due to its enormous influence. Some compare it to the industrial revolution. However, as explained above, this has its own pitfalls. It can wreak havoc if not used rationally.
Disclaimer
The above views are the author’s own.
end of article
