Artificial intelligence has quietly entered India’s courtrooms. From translating judgments into regional languages to helping judges sift through mountains of case files, AI is reshaping how justice is delivered — while raising profound questions about fairness and accountability.

The Tools Already in Use

SUPACE — Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court Efficiency

Launched by the Supreme Court, SUPACE is an AI-assisted system that helps identify relevant facts and precedents in a case, reducing the time judges and clerks spend on research. Crucially, SUPACE does not decide cases — it assists, leaving legal reasoning firmly with the judge.

SUVAS — Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software

SUVAS is a machine-assisted translation tool that converts judgments and orders into Indian languages. Having expanded well beyond its initial launch, it has translated tens of thousands of judgments, with human experts reviewing the output. In recent developments it has begun integrating with Bhashini, the national language-translation mission, widening access to justice for non-English speakers.

The e-Courts Project (Phase III)

Running from 2023 to 2027, Phase III funds digitisation, virtual courts, e-filing and AI initiatives across the judiciary, building the digital backbone on which these tools run.

How AI Helps

• Faster legal research: surfacing relevant precedents and statutes in seconds.
• Case management: flagging priority cases, detecting defects in filings and predicting hearing timelines.
• Language access: translating judgments so litigants can read decisions in their own language.
• Transcription: converting oral arguments into text for the record.

The Guardrails

Indian courts have been deliberately cautious. The consistent position is that AI must remain assistive, not decisive. A judge’s independent application of mind cannot be delegated to an algorithm. In late 2025, the Supreme Court reportedly outlined a policy framework (a white paper) on the responsible use of AI in the judiciary, emphasising human oversight, transparency and data security.

The Risks

• Bias: AI trained on historical data can reproduce existing prejudices.
• Opacity: “black box” models make it hard to explain why a suggestion was made.
• Accountability: responsibility for a decision must always rest with a human judge.
• Privacy: sensitive litigant data must be protected.

A Word of Caution from the Bench

Courts abroad have penalised lawyers for citing fake, AI-generated case law — a reminder that generative tools can “hallucinate.” Indian judges and advocates are increasingly alert to verifying every AI-assisted output against authentic sources.

Conclusion

AI will not replace judges, but it is fast becoming an indispensable assistant — cutting delay, widening access and lightening the administrative load. The challenge for India is to harness these gains while keeping human judgment, fairness and constitutional values at the centre of justice.