Technology must aid, not replace, human mind in judicial decision: CJI

Technology must complement, not replace, the human mind in judicial decision-making, Chief Justice of India BR Gavai has said while emphasising that the value of discretion, empathy and judicial interpretation is irreplaceable.

In his keynote address on "Role of Technology in the Indian Legal System" at the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS) of the University of London, the CJI said while the judiciary welcomes innovations like automated cause lists, digital kiosks and virtual assistants, it must ensure that human oversight, ethical guidelines and robust training are integral to their implementation.

"The value of discretion, empathy and judicial interpretation is irreplaceable," Justice Gavai said and pointed out that the Indian judiciary is well-positioned to develop homegrown ethical frameworks tailored to the country's constitutional and societal realities.

"We possess the technological expertise, the judicial foresight and the democratic mandate to build systems that reflect our values of equality, dignity and justice," he said.

"In fact, in the very first week after assuming office as the chief justice of India, I initiated a discussion with the Centre for Research and Planning of the Supreme Court to prepare a comprehensive note on the ethical use of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies in the judiciary.

"Technology must complement, not replace, the human mind in judicial decision-making," the CJI said, adding, "The emphasis must always be on using technology to enhance trust and transparency -- never to replace the human conscience at the heart of justice."  He said though the judiciary has started to embrace technology, with the emergence of artificial-intelligence (AI) tools in judicial processes -- from case management to legal research, document translation and even predictive analytics -- there must be caution.

"Around the world, debates are ongoing about the ethical use of AI in legal systems. Concerns include algorithmic bias, misinformation, data manipulation and breaches of confidentiality. For instance, sensitive information, such as the identity of a victim of crime, must never be disclosed due to AI error or the absence of clear protocols. Additionally, a few recent cases have shown that AI tools can generate fabricated citations or biased suggestions if not properly regulated and monitored," the CJI underscored.

He added that technology, if anchored in constitutionalism and empathy, can transform access to justice from an abstract ideal into a lived and shared reality.

"As we continue our journey toward modernising the Indian legal system, our approach must remain deeply rooted in constitutional values. The integration of technology must be people-centric, inclusive and guided by ethical clarity. Our ultimate goal should be to make justice accessible to every citizen, regardless of language, geography, income or digital literacy," he said.

Concluding his address, Justice Gavai said, "I firmly believe that access to justice is not solely the responsibility of the judiciary. It is a shared national commitment. Law schools, civil society, legal-aid institutions and governments must work in unison to develop and promote technological models that are accessible, transparent and inclusive."  Meanwhile, at a joint event of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) and Trilegal organised on the occasion of London International Disputes Week, CJI Gavai said in recent decades, the justice-delivery mechanism, once confined within the boundaries of courtrooms, has witnessed a significant shift towards modes of alternative dispute resolution, with arbitration emerging as a prominent pillar of that transformation.

The CJI was speaking on the topic of "Navigating the evolving landscape: The impact of the 7th edition of the SIAC Rules on India-Related Arbitrations".

"At the cusp of this evolution lies the recognition that justice, particularly in complex commercial disputes, need not be adversarial or bureaucratic. Rather, it must be confidential, expert-driven and above all, tailored to the needs of those who seek it. Arbitration, in this context, is a substantive recalibration of how we understand and deliver justice," he said.

Justice Gavai pointed out that over the last 10-15 years, India has made a multi-pronged effort towards its aspiration of building a favourable and sought-after place for arbitration.

"While legislative reforms have significantly strengthened India's arbitration framework, the judiciary has also played a proactive role in fostering a more arbitration-friendly environment. Various progressive judgments by the Supreme Court of India over the last few years stand testament to this. Nonetheless, the enormity of India as a country has ensured that certain on-ground challenges continue," he said.

"The Indian judiciary has and will continue to recognise and respect the autonomy of the arbitral process, ensuring that the courts step in only when demanded by the needs of justice," he added.

The CJI said, "In conclusion, I am happy to note that the 7th edition of the SIAC Rules is a forward-looking endeavour, aimed at enhancing efficiency while balancing fairness. For India, whose commercial players are increasingly global in outlook and operation, these rules offer both an opportunity and a challenge -- the opportunity to align with international best practices and the challenge to elevate our own standards while balancing them with India's practical realities.