Artificial Intelligence (AI) usage in India and in various institutional activities governing the state has changed the way institutions function in their day-to-day activities, be it financial sectors, IT sectors, or the Indian Judiciary System. The Indian Judiciary System is no exception in the adoption of this new era of AI-driven work culture. Various tools like SUPACE (Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency) and SUVAS (Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software) have been introduced. The former, introduced by the Supreme Court of India, is used for providing decision-making information, while the latter acts as a catalyst in reducing regional linguistic barriers by translating judgments into various regional languages, thus providing more efficient and understandable decisions and judgments. The National Judicial Data Grid (NJDG) documented that around 3,89,41,148 cases are pending at the District and Taluka levels and 58,43,113 are still unresolved at the high courts. The delay in outcomes and the resulting restlessness and anxiety in the process of delivering justice take immense time, resources, reliable information, and proper assistance.

Usage of AI in Developed States: Insights from the U.S.A and China

The use of Artificial Intelligence, like COMPAS (Correctional Offender Management Profiling for Alternative Solutions) in the U.S., assists judges in delivering judgments by analyzing factors such as “Mental Health” and “Criminal History” to predict the likelihood of recidivism. The presence of AI usage in the Chinese Judiciary System is evidenced by China’s Smart Court system, which aids judges in delivering quicker and faster decisions using AI-backed technologies and stored data from past cases to deliver decisions in similar cases.

Artificial Intelligence (AI): India’s Episode

In the era of the AI revolution, the usage of AI implies high machine learning to reduce time and cost with high efficiency and productive functioning of judicial institutions. The remarkable tenure of Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud has seen the introduction of technology in the judiciary system. The fusion and introduction of AI in judiciary activities have revolutionized the way the judiciary system works in India. The positive outcomes of technology usage have been documented by the Madras High Court, which demonstrated an exceptional case clearance rate of 114% in 2022, surpassing the high court case clearance rate. The introduction of AI tools like SUPACE and SUVAS in the Indian Judiciary System and increased usage of technology in communicating, delivering, and providing easier and more understandable judgments (with translations of decisions to regional languages by SUVAS) have made the institution function more productively and efficiently, leading to faster delivery of judgments and reducing regional and linguistic disparity in a country like India with a multi-linguistic culture.

Debate on AI in the Judiciary: Evaluating Trust, Reliability, and Accountability

The debate brings two important questions to the table: 1) “Whether to trust AI or not?” and 2) “Can it be trusted with reliability in the Judiciary System of a State?” The algorithm of AI is based on large data, which includes sensitive information about individuals. More importantly, the generalization in delivering quicker judgments based on evidence from past cases stored as data in the AI system can challenge the “Judgment Wisdom” of a system exercising the judiciary functions of a state. In cases of misleading legal advice due to the absence of a professional code of conduct in Machine Learning Systems, who will be held accountable?

However, to address such unforeseen issues in the judiciary system, many developed states like the United Kingdom and members of the European Union have adopted and advocated for an “Artificial Intelligence Act.” This amendment aims to reduce the impact of biases in AI algorithms. In the context of India, NITI Aayog has developed a set of principles that include Safety, Equality, Inclusivity, Non-Discrimination, and Accountability. Additionally, the Digital Personal Data Protection Bill (Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology) advocates for the right of an individual to inquire about the data collected from them by any entities.

The use of Artificial Intelligence by the judiciary system can be both beneficial and dangerous (if not anchored in the reliability and trustworthiness of the designer or developer of the particular AI tool used in the Judiciary). Though the usage of SUVAS and SUPACE in India has had a positive impact on delivering judgments to a multi-linguistic population in a nation like India, the rise in AI usage globally, with the introduction of more systems and tools like COMPAS in the U.S. and China’s Smart Court System, helps judges deliver quicker decisions based on behavioural (historical) evidence of individuals. This can indeed be a revolution in the system itself. However, blind reliability, with no accountability and law enforcement in the judiciary (to protect the data and individuals), can be dangerous and question the judiciary system's ability to deliver justice. However, with proper amendments to laws like those in the U.K. and EU states, these should be used as baseline examples in formulating “New AI-Centric Laws” to guard privacy and demonstrate reliability in the system used by the judiciary. One such remarkable step is initiated by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology by proposing the Personal Data Protection Bill.

IBM