Inside SC’s proposed regulations for AI use in courts: what’s allowed, what’s barred

📌 Summary:

• The Supreme Court released the draft "Regulations for Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Courts, 2026" to build a governance framework for AI in the judiciary; comments were invited by July 15
• Not automatically binding: they come into force for the SC on a date notified by the CJI, and separately for each High Court (and its subordinate courts/tribunals) on dates notified by that HC’s Chief Justice; different provisions can be phased in
• Permitted uses (with written approval and human supervision): case management, transcription, translation, legal research, document summarisation, accessibility and court administration
• AI cannot decide cases: no judicial outcome may be reached through algorithmic decision-making alone or solely on AI-generated information; AI use in decisions is only advisory, subject to independent human judicial evaluation
• Absolutely prohibited ("non-derogable"): risk scoring for flight risk, predicting recidivism, evaluating bail eligibility, judging witness credibility, profiling/predicting future conduct of parties, submitting AI output as independent evidence without disclosure, and using black-box (unexplainable) AI in matters affecting personal liberty
• Transparency: litigants are to be informed if AI was used in their case

🎯 UPSC Relevance: GS2 — judiciary and judicial reform, technology in governance, due process and personal liberty; GS3 — AI regulation and ethics.

📝 Prelims Facts:

• Draft: Regulations for Use of AI in Courts, 2026 (Supreme Court); public comments due July 15
• Brought into force for SC by the CJI; for High Courts by the respective HC Chief Justice
• Black-box AI barred in matters affecting personal liberty

🔑 Key Term: Black-box AI — AI systems whose internal decision-making cannot be readily explained or interpreted by humans.