With judges overwhelmed and trials stretching into decades, next-gen AI tools promise to transform India’s justice delivery. But experts warn that without safeguards, the cure may create new risks.
India’s judiciary is groaning under the weight of nearly 5 crore (50 million) pending cases, according to the National Judicial Data Grid. At the current pace, it could take over 300 years to clear the caseload. Nearly 80% of prisoners remain undertrials, and with just 21 judges per million people, India has one of the lowest judge-to-population ratios in the world.
Courtrooms across the country still rely heavily on stenographers, clerks, and British-era filing systems. Judges are often forced to dictate orders while stenographers type, or spend hours searching for files buried in record rooms. This backlog has led to routine adjournments, delayed bail hearings, and a justice delivery system that many citizens see as broken.
Against this backdrop, courts are turning to artificial intelligence. Companies like Nyaay AI, Jhana AI, and Adalat AI have built tools tailored for Indian courts, trained on local languages, jargon, and workflows. These platforms offer e-filing automation, document defect detection, case summarisation, and multilingual translation—tasks that once consumed weeks of manpower.
The results are already visible. A judge in South India found that recording a witness statement that once took 60 minutes can now be completed in 10 minutes. Nyaay AI has partnered with 16 high courts, the Supreme Court, and even Singapore’s judiciary, while Adalat AI’s transcription tools are being deployed in 3,500 courtrooms. By 2026, such tools could reach half of India’s court system.
Experts say clustering cases of similar nature through AI could allow judges to resolve bundles of disputes at once, shaving months off trial times. “The gridlock is unsustainable,” one legal tech entrepreneur noted. “AI can restore breathing room in a suffocating system.”
Yet optimism is tempered by caution. Concerns over AI hallucinations, privacy breaches, and over-reliance on automation loom large. In 2023, a Manhattan federal judge fined a lawyer $5,000 for citing fictitious case law generated by ChatGPT. In India, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and CJI Gavai have both warned against using AI for judicial decision-making.
Firms like Jhana AI are trying to build guardrails, creating a corpus of 15 million Indian legal documents to ensure citations are authentic. But challenges remain, particularly in lower courts and tribunals, where infrastructure is weak, electricity and internet access are patchy, and files remain bulky paper records.
India’s justice delivery system is straining under crushing weight. From the Supreme Court to district courts, backlogs stretch into decades, denying timely justice to millions. Against this backdrop, AI is being seen as both a lifeline and a gamble.
With judges overwhelmed and trials stretching into decades, next-gen AI tools promise to transform India’s justice delivery. But experts warn that without safeguards, the cure may create new risks.
Contents
India’s judiciary is groaning under the weight of nearly 5 crore (50 million) pending cases, according to the National Judicial Data Grid. At the current pace, it could take over 300 years to clear the caseload. Nearly 80% of prisoners remain undertrials, and with just 21 judges per million people, India has one of the lowest judge-to-population ratios in the world.
Courtrooms across the country still rely heavily on stenographers, clerks, and British-era filing systems. Judges are often forced to dictate orders while stenographers type, or spend hours searching for files buried in record rooms. This backlog has led to routine adjournments, delayed bail hearings, and a justice delivery system that many citizens see as broken.
Against this backdrop, courts are turning to artificial intelligence. Companies like Nyaay AI, Jhana AI, and Adalat AI have built tools tailored for Indian courts, trained on local languages, jargon, and workflows. These platforms offer e-filing automation, document defect detection, case summarisation, and multilingual translation—tasks that once consumed weeks of manpower.
The results are already visible. A judge in South India found that recording a witness statement that once took 60 minutes can now be completed in 10 minutes. Nyaay AI has partnered with 16 high courts, the Supreme Court, and even Singapore’s judiciary, while Adalat AI’s transcription tools are being deployed in 3,500 courtrooms. By 2026, such tools could reach half of India’s court system.
Experts say clustering cases of similar nature through AI could allow judges to resolve bundles of disputes at once, shaving months off trial times. “The gridlock is unsustainable,” one legal tech entrepreneur noted. “AI can restore breathing room in a suffocating system.”
Yet optimism is tempered by caution. Concerns over AI hallucinations, privacy breaches, and over-reliance on automation loom large. In 2023, a Manhattan federal judge fined a lawyer $5,000 for citing fictitious case law generated by ChatGPT. In India, Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and CJI Gavai have both warned against using AI for judicial decision-making.
Firms like Jhana AI are trying to build guardrails, creating a corpus of 15 million Indian legal documents to ensure citations are authentic. But challenges remain, particularly in lower courts and tribunals, where infrastructure is weak, electricity and internet access are patchy, and files remain bulky paper records.
India’s justice delivery system is straining under crushing weight. From the Supreme Court to district courts, backlogs stretch into decades, denying timely justice to millions. Against this backdrop, AI is being seen as both a lifeline and a gamble.
Advantages:
Risks and Ethical Concerns
But for every promise, there is a peril. Judges, lawyers, and civil society have voiced serious concerns about over-reliance on algorithms.
Quick Share
