- Hindi News
- National
- Supreme Court Vs AI; Fake Judgement | Bar Council Andhra Pradesh Property Case
New Delhi/Vijayawada56 minutes ago
- copy link
The Supreme Court, while hearing the petition against the decision of Andhra Pradesh High Court on Monday, said that it is wrong to write the decision on the evidence created with the help of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The court said that this was not an act done by mistake.
A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Alok Aradhe said it wanted to examine its consequences and accountability as it directly impacts the integrity of the adjudication process. The court has issued notices to Attorney General R Venkataramani, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta and Bar Council of India in this matter.
In fact, in August last year, a trial court of Andhra Pradesh had given its verdict in the case of disputed property on the basis of a picture made by AI. A petition was filed in the Andhra Pradesh High Court against the decision. In January this year, the High Court had also rejected the petition. After this an appeal was made in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court also said this…
- If a decision is based on non-existent or fake evidence, it is not just a mistake but serious misconduct.
- Legal action can be taken in such a case. Notice is issued to the Attorney General, Solicitor General and Bar Council of India.
- The trial court had appointed an Advocate-Commissioner to look into the status of the disputed property during the case. The petitioners expressed objection to the commissioner’s report.
- This case raises serious concerns about the process of delivering justice, rather than the outcome of the verdict.
Supreme Court gave instructions to the trial court
The bench agreed to hear the petition and issued notice on it. The court said, till the disposal of the special leave petition, we direct that the trial court will not proceed on the basis of the report of the Advocate-Commissioner. And the hearing of the case was fixed for March 10.
Earlier, while hearing a separate case on February 17, the court had expressed serious concern over the increasing trend of filing petitions prepared with AI tools.
———-
Read this news also…
Supreme Court’s question – What is the benefit of NOTA: Has the quality of leaders improved, why is it necessary if there is only one candidate?
On February 24, the Supreme Court has raised questions on the utility and impact of NOTA (None of the Above) option. The court on Tuesday asked the government what is its benefit, has the quality of elected leaders improved with the introduction of NOTA? The court said that NOTA cannot fill any seat and hence its effect is limited. If there is only one candidate for a seat, is it still necessary? Read the full news…
Source link
[ad_3]
