CJI Gavai says judiciary is well aware of AI misuse: 'We've seen our morphed pics too'

CJI BR Gavai

Chief Justice of India Bhushan R. Gavai on Monday said the judiciary is well aware of the misuse of artificial intelligence (AI), including the spread of morphed images of judges, but also emphasised that it is the executive’s role to decide on regulating such technologies.

“We have seen our morphed pictures too,” remarked the CJI during the hearing of a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking a legal and policy framework for the use of Generative AI (GenAI) in judicial and quasi-judicial systems. He added, “…this is essentially a policy matter. It is for the executive to take a call.”

The bench, which also included Justice K Vinod Chandran, indicated that it was not inclined to intervene, noting that matters involving emerging technology governance fall within the policymaking domain. The case was adjourned for two weeks at the petitioner’s request.

The PIL, filed by advocate Kartikeya Rawal with advocate-on-record Abhinav Shrivastava, has urged the Centre to frame a law or policy ensuring the “regulated and uniform” use of GenAI in judicial systems.

The petition also marked the differences between GenAI and conventional AI, while pointing out that its ability to independently generate new text, reasoning as well as data introduces unique risks such as “hallucinations,” where the system fabricates non-existent legal principles or case citations.

“The characteristic of GenAI being a black box and having opaqueness has the possibility of creating ambiguity in the legal system,” the plea stated, warning that such flaws could result in fake case laws, biased interpretations, and arbitrary reasoning, potentially infringing Article 14 (right to equality).

The petitioner also highlighted that since the judiciary relies on traceable reasoning and legal precedent, the opaque functioning of GenAI models, often described as “black boxes", poses oversight challenges even for developers.

The PIL also stated that the GenAI models that are trained on real-world data could intensify biases against marginalised groups and that without any safeguards on data neutrality and ownership, AI-assisted systems might shadow citizens’ right to information under Article 19(1)(a).

The petition further drew attention to the possibility of cyberattacks on AI-integrated judicial systems if court documents or processes are automated without adequate security measures.