India's top court sets strict rules for AI in courts, banning its use in decision-making

India's Supreme Court is establishing clear boundaries for Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the judicial system with a new set of draft regulations. The proposals aim to balance technological advancement with the preservation of judicial independence, requiring lawyers to disclose any AI-assisted work and strictly prohibiting AI's use in critical decision-making processes.

The draft Regulations for Use of Artificial Intelligence in Courts, 2026, currently open for public comment, emphasize that AI systems should only serve in an assistive capacity. They explicitly state that AI cannot replace judges, with the ultimate authority for determining law, fact, and justice resting solely with judicial officers. This framework, developed by the Supreme Court's AI Committee, seeks to create uniform standards across all levels of the Indian judiciary.

A significant provision, Regulation 20, lists prohibited AI uses. AI systems are barred from independently making judicial decisions, passing sentences, or performing adjudicatory functions. Any AI-generated recommendations for adjudication or sentencing will be purely advisory and subject to independent judicial review. Furthermore, AI-based risk assessment tools are prohibited for determining flight risk, predicting recidivism, setting bail eligibility, or evaluating the credibility of parties and witnesses. Courts also cannot use AI to predict or profile the future behavior of individuals involved in legal proceedings.

While imposing strict limitations, the draft also encourages the responsible adoption of AI to improve access to justice, reduce case backlogs, and enhance administrative efficiency. Permitted uses include legal research, precedent retrieval, citation verification, document summarization, translation, transcription, case management, scheduling, and AI-powered litigant assistance tools. However, all these applications require human supervision and approval. A key transparency measure, Regulation 43, mandates that lawyers and litigants disclose the use of AI in preparing court documents and submissions through a prescribed declaration.

“

the ultimate authority to determine matters of law, fact and justice shall vest exclusively in the judicial officers of the competent jurisdiction.