New Delhi, Aug 26: Chief Justice of India Surya Kant on Wednesday said the judiciary’s governing principle is that artificial intelligence may augment judicial reasoning, but it cannot substitute judicial conscience, and that a permanent apex body has been proposed to supervise the adoption and accountability of the new technology.
Speaking at a bilateral meeting with Ulrich Herrmann, the presiding judge of the Federal Court of Justice at Karlsruhe in Germany, CJI Kant said that artificial intelligence (AI) is being used in certain defined support functions such as legal research, judgement translation into 16 languages and as a conversational interface for citizens to look for case status and procedures.
He said that while these tools are designed to reduce repetitive work, they do not determine judicial outcomes.
“Artificial intelligence may augment judicial reasoning, but it cannot substitute judicial conscience. Draft regulations from the Supreme Court’s AI Committee permit administrative uses such as scheduling, transcription and translation, while barring AI from assessing witness credibility, flight risk, recidivism or bail eligibility; a permanent apex body has been proposed to supervise the adoption and accountability of AI,” he said.
“Our two judiciaries share the same underlying responsibility: to preserve judicial independence and public confidence while adapting our institutions to new forms of litigation and new expectations of access.
“Technology and administrative reform can support this responsibility, but neither can replace careful adjudication, human judgment and fidelity to law,” he said.
The CJI said that institutional mediation centres, Lok Adalats and digital Lok Adalats, including the Supreme Court’s recent special Lok Adalat, ‘Samadhan Samaroh’, have brought settlement within reach of parties well beyond major cities, supported by trained professionals, case managers and secure digital systems.
“As two major trading partners, our judiciaries and mediation institutions stand to gain from exchanging experience on cross-border commercial mediation, the recognition and enforcement of mediated settlements, and joint training for mediators handling India-Germany commercial disputes,” he said.
At the outset, the CJI said that both the countries have developed different judicial structures and legal traditions, as India follows a common-law tradition with one integrated judicial hierarchy, while Germany has a civil-law system with separate branches of federal jurisdiction.
“These differences make the exchange particularly useful. They allow us to compare how our institutions deal with the same practical concerns, including appellate workload, consistency of case law, timely disposal, judicial administration and access to justice,” he said.
The CJI said he is approaching the meeting with three themes that speak directly to the challenges the two judiciaries share, such as harnessing technology and AI in the administration of justice, strengthening cross-border mediation and other dispute resolution mechanisms, and deepening institutional cooperation through an MoU.
“I also see considerable value in identifying areas in which our courts, judges, registries and judicial academies can continue this engagement through a structured and reciprocal programme,” he said.
The CJI said he sees value in anchoring any MoU in the themes already discussed: technology and AI in court administration, and cross-border mediation and dispute resolution, alongside the commercial and business law focus and the digitalisation of judicial processes that the Hanseatic court’s concept note already identifies as priorities.
“I propose that each side identify one institutional point of contact so that today’s discussion can be converted into a workable programme, with the MoU or another suitable arrangement to follow once the appropriate authorities on both sides have considered its scope, frequency, participants, confidentiality requirements and working language,” he said.
Giving an overview of the Indian judiciary, the CJI said that unlike Germany, India has no separate constitutional court.
“The Supreme Court is simultaneously the final appellate court in civil and criminal matters and the country’s highest constitutional court, with original jurisdiction under Article 32 to enforce fundamental rights,” he said.
The CJI also said that India’s approach has been to make courts not merely more technological, but more accessible, transparent and responsive for every stakeholder in the justice delivery system.
On the shared institutional challenge, CJI Kant said Germany’s electronic case files, the e-Justice council, the Bund-Laender Commission and the proposed Federal Justice Cloud reflect a similar commitment to a secure digital foundation for justice delivery.
“Both our judiciaries agree that judicial decisions must remain with judges and legally authorised judicial officers, whatever the degree of digital transformation,” he said.
Promoting mediation as another mode of dispute resolution has always been at the top of the priority list of the Chief Justice of India, right from day one, CJI Kant said.
The CJI is on a four-day visit to Germany and the UK during which he will address several programmes.
