Faced with repeated misuse of artificial intelligence (AI) in court proceedings, the Supreme Court has asked the Bar Council of India to set up an expert panel to examine issues arising from the use of to create non-existent judgments and cite them in courts.A Bench led by Justice PS Narasimha told the BCI – which regulates the legal profession in India — that the expert panel should submit a report to the top court. It posted the matter for further consideration on May 26.There must be accountability and integrity in judicial proceedings and the parties cannot just rely on AI-generated cases and apologise for it when caught, said the Bench which also included Justice Alok Aradhe.Expressing concerns over the absence of sovereign large language models and the risk of hallucinations, the Bench on May 5 clarified that it didn’t want to prohibit the use of AI in the judiciary.Attorney General R Venkataramani said that he would interact with the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology before placing his views on this issue.Amicus Curiae senior counsel Shyam Divan told the Bench that the Supreme Court’s Centre for Research and Planning has prepared a white paper on AI in the judiciary containing recommendations and guidelines which could serve as a starting point for the court’s inquiry and for issuing directions.Taking exception to an Andhra Pradesh trial court relying on non-existent, Artificial Intelligence-generated judgments, the Supreme Court had on February 27 issued notices to Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and the BCI to find out ways to deal with the problem.“We take cognizance of the Trial Court deploying AI generated non-existing, fake or synthetic alleged judgments and seek to examine its consequences and accountability as it has a direct bearing on integrity of adjudicatory process,” it said in its February 27 order.“This case assumes considerable institutional concern, not because of the decision that was taken on the merits of the case, but about the process of adjudication and determination,” the top court said.“At the outset, we must declare that a decision based on such non-existent and fake alleged judgments is not an error in the decision making. It would be misconduct and legal consequences shall follow. It is compelling that we examine this issue in more detail,” it said.Pending disposal of the matter before it, the Bench directed the trial court not to proceed further in the case.The misuse of non-existent, AI-generated judgments came to light during hearing a petition challenging a January order of the Andhra Pradesh High Court on a suit for injunction.The petitioners had challenged an Advocate-Commissioner’s report by raising certain objections. The trial court had in August last year dismissed the objections, relying on Subramani v. M Natarajan (2013) 14 SCC 95, Chidambaram Pillai v. SAL Ramasamy (1071) 2 SCC 68, Lakshmi Devi v. K. Prabha (2006) 5 SCC 551 and Gajanan v. Ramdas (2015) 6 SCC 223.However, the petitioner challenged the trial court’s order on the ground that the verdicts relied on by the trial court were fake and non-existent.The high court considered the objection and realised that the judgments in question were AI-generated, the top court noted.Shocked by a non-existent judgment ‘Mercy versus Mankind’ cited in a petition, the Supreme Court had on February 17 expressed serious concern over the growing trend of some lawyers filing petitions drafted with the help of AI tools.“We are alarmed to reflect that some lawyers have started using AI to draft petitions. It is absolutely uncalled for,” a Bench led by CJI Surya Kant had said while hearing a PIL filed by academician Roop Rekha Verma seeking guidelines on political speeches.On January 20, the top court had expressed serious concern over the use of fabricated and AI-generated evidence in matrimonial disputes. Driven by desire to ‘teach the other side a lesson’ at any cost, couples were increasingly misusing technology to construct cases on the basis of false allegations, it had said.“Whenever the parties in a matrimonial dispute have differences, the preparation starts as to how to teach a lesson to the other side. Evidence is collected and, in some cases, even created, which is more often in the era of artificial intelligence. False allegations are rampant”, a Bench of Justice Rajesh Bindal and Justice Manmohan had said, dissolving a Delhi couple’s marriage on the grounds of irretrievable breakdown of marriage.