Mentors Comment
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is steadily entering the Indian judiciary, promising efficiency in a system burdened with nearly five crore pending cases. However, without proper guardrails, it risks undermining the very foundation of justice. The recent Kerala High Court guidelines mark India’s first attempt at framing policy around AI use in judicial processes. This is a critical juncture where technology and justice intersect demanding careful balance between innovation and accountability.
Introduction
The integration of Artificial Intelligence into courts represents a paradigm shift in India’s judicial landscape. While AI tools such as transcription, translation, and defect detection offer solutions to systemic inefficiencies, their unregulated use could lead to serious ethical and legal risks. From mistranslations of legal terminology to hallucinations in Large Language Models (LLMs), the challenges are real. The need of the hour is a structured framework that ensures AI strengthens, rather than weakens, the judiciary’s integrity and human-centric decision-making.
The Growing Relevance of AI in Courts
- First policy initiative: In July 2025, the Kerala High Court released the “Policy Regarding Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools in District Judiciary,” the first of its kind in India.
- Case Management & Reducing Pendency: AI can assist in case listing, tracking, and prioritization to improve efficiency. Eg: The Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court’s Efficiency (SUPACE) developed by the Supreme Court helps judges analyze case facts quickly.
- Enhancing Transparency & Access to Justice: AI chatbots and online portals assist litigants in understanding procedures, filing cases, and accessing justice without middlemen. Eg: The Supreme Court’s AI-driven translation project ‘SUVAS’ (Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software) translates judgments into regional languages to empower citizens.
|
Why are AI-enabled court processes risky?
- Mistranslation risks: In India, the Supreme Court’s AI-based translation initiative SUVAS once mistranslated “leave granted” as “chhutti manzoor” (holiday approved) in Hind
- Hallucinations in AI: LLMs such as Whisper generate fictitious phrases when encountering pauses, leading to unreliable records.
- Bias in legal research: AI search results may amplify user patterns, invisibilising relevant precedents, impacting fair adjudication.
- Reductionist adjudication: AI risks turning nuanced judicial reasoning into mere rule-based inference, undermining human judgment.
How is AI being used in courts today?
- Pilot tools: Market tools are in test use for transcription of oral arguments and witness depositions, though without timelines or safeguards.
- Manual checks: Current safeguards include retired judges and translators manually vetting AI-generated judgments.
- Risk of dependency: Courts adopting AI pilots without frameworks risk becoming dependent on vendors without sustainable adoption plans.
What are the guardrails necessary for responsible AI use?
- Critical AI literacy: Judges, lawyers and staff need capacity-building to understand both potential and limitations of AI.
- Transparency rights: Litigants should be informed if AI is used in research or judgment-writing; they should also have the right to opt out.
- Procurement standards: Courts need standardised procurement guidelines to assess reliability, explainability, data handling, and vendor compliance.
- Dedicated tech offices: The Vision Document for Phase III of the eCourts Project suggests creating technology offices to guide courts in evaluating and adopting AI tools.
The way forward for AI in judiciary
- Balanced adoption: AI must serve the ends of justice, not replace human reasoning.
- Infrastructure readiness: Reliable internet and hardware are prerequisites before full-scale deployment.
- Oversight and accountability: Independent monitoring systems and ethical review frameworks must be built into adoption.
Conclusion
AI can be a transformative force in India’s judiciary, addressing inefficiencies in a system struggling under massive case pendency. But technology without guardrails risks introducing new layers of error, bias, and opacity. The ultimate purpose of judicial reform must remain the same, to deliver fair, timely, and human-centred justice. Clear guidelines, transparency, and ethical oversight will determine whether AI strengthens or weakens the rule of law in India.
Value Addition
|
AI is already being deployed in judicial systems worldwide to improve efficiency, accessibility, and decision-making.
- Legal Interpretation Aid: Judges in the U.S. used AI to clarify the meaning of complex legal terms during sentencing appeals.
- Victim Impact Statement: Arizona courts allowed AI to recreate a victim’s voice for delivering impact statements.
- Affordable Legal Services: Garfield AI in the UK provides cheap legal documents, reducing case backlog.
- Responsible AI Use Rules: California courts framed formal guidelines for safe AI adoption in judicial work.
- Transcription & Translation (India): Supreme Court uses AI for live transcription and translation of hearings.
- Case Summarization (India): Nyay-Darpan delivers summaries and similar case retrieval in consumer law disputes.
- Case Classification (Brazil): AI model routes Supreme Court cases, cutting delays in document handling.
- AI Judge for Small Claims (China): Smart Courts handle repetitive small cases via AI systems.
- Judicial Summaries (Brazil): AI tools assist in generating summaries, easing court management.
- Access to Justice (Canada): Botler AI chatbot helps citizens understand rights in harassment cases.
|
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2018] E-Governance is not only about utilization of technology but also about the ‘use value’ of information. Explain.
Linkage: The 2018 UPSC question on E-Governance and ‘use value’ of information directly links to AI in judiciary: while AI can speed up translations, research, and transcription, its real worth lies in enhancing accessibility, transparency, and fairness in justice delivery—not just technological adoption.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Introduction
Independence Day speeches are often symbolic, but in 2025 the Prime Minister shifted focus to frontier technologies, semiconductors, clean energy, AI, quantum computing, and defence indigenisation. Unlike earlier years, this vision was paired with the acknowledgment that bureaucratic inertia and regulatory red tape remain India’s toughest hurdles. The central challenge is whether India’s governance structures can keep pace with its technological ambitions.
Significance of the 2025 Speech by the Prime Minister
- Future focus: Strong emphasis on frontier areas like semiconductors, EVs, and jet engines.
- Symbolic push: The PM asked if fighter jet engines should not be Indian-made.
- Bold promise: India will shed dependency in two decades.
- Data milestone: India is the largest per capita data consumer (32 GB), ahead of China and the US.
India’s current position in technology and self-reliance
- Strength in mid-tech: Success in fintech, data access, and digitisation
- Emerging hubs: Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Pune, Gurugram drive high-tech growth.
- Import dependency: India depends heavily on imports in semiconductors, defence hardware, AI hardware, and clean energy technologies.
- Global presence: Firms like Nvidia and IBM rely on India’s talent pool, but domestic ecosystems remain thin.
|
Bureaucratic Challenges that obstruct deep-tech ambition
- Colonial bureaucratic legacy: The Westminster model prioritised control over innovation and accountability.
- Rigid steel frame: The “steel frame” of the civil services designed to ensure subservience to colonial administrators remains rigid even a century after the Public Service Commission’s creation in 1926.
- Unrealised reforms: The Veerappa Moily Committee (2005) suggested domain experts and ethics codes-still pending.
- Lateral entry limits: Attempts at inducting experts face systemic resistance.
Why are regulatory and judicial reforms critical?
- Persistent red tape: The Deregulation Commission (2025) was set up to identify redundant compliance norms, but structural bottlenecks persist.
- Judicial backlog: Slow dispute resolution and investment climate, affectshigh-tech sectors.
- Comparative lessons:
- US & China: Despite different models, both empower political leadership over bureaucracy to push national interests.
- UK: Even Britain debates its bureaucratic model, Dominic Cummings under Boris Johnson pushed for external competition and greater ministerial control.
How does this link to Viksit Bharat@2047?
- Ambition vs. architecture: India’s goal of becoming a deep-tech powerhouse is contingent not just on financial investment but on restructuring governance.
- Symbolic timing: The UPSC centenary in 2026 is a historic chance for overhaul.
- Future-readiness: Without structural reform, Atmanirbhar Bharat may remain aspirational.
Conclusion
India’s ambition to lead in deep-tech must be matched with institutional reform. The PM’s 2025 speech acknowledged that Atmanirbharta is as much about fixing bureaucratic bottlenecks as building jet engines or quantum labs. The centenary of UPSC offers an opportune moment to align India’s governance with its 2047 goals.
| Value Addition |
| Committees on Civil Service Reforms
1. Santhanam Committee (1964)
- Focus: Preventive corruption measures.
- Key suggestion: Creation of the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC).
2. Kothari Committee (1976)
- Focus: Recruitment and exam structure of Civil Services.
- Key suggestion: Recommended 3-stage exam (Prelims, Mains, Interview), which is still followed today.
3. Satish Chandra Committee (1989)
- Focus: Review of recruitment and selection.
- Key suggestion: Increased emphasis on aptitude and ethics in recruitment.
4. Hota Committee (2004)
- Focus: Ethics, transparency, and performance.
- Key suggestion: Right to Information, performance-linked incentives, citizen charters.
5. Second Administrative Reforms Commission (ARC) – Veerappa Moily (2005–2009)
Most comprehensive civil service reform report (15 volumes). Key suggestions:
- Lateral entry of domain experts.
- Code of Ethics & Code of Conduct.
- Citizen-centric administration
- Performance-based appraisal system.
- Training in e-governance and modern management practices
6. Punchhi Commission (2010) – on Centre-State relations
- Relevant link: Stressed need for civil service neutrality in federal governance.
7. Baswan Committee (2016)
- Focus: UPSC exam age and attempts.
- Key suggestion: Reduce maximum age for UPSC CSE (though not implemented).
8. Current initiatives
- Lateral entry into Joint Secretary and Director-level posts.
- Mission Karmayogi (2020): National Programme for Civil Services Capacity Building (NPCSCB) to train officers with competency-based framework.
- Deregulation Commission (2025): Identifying and scrapping redundant compliances.
|
Mapping Microthemes
- GS Paper-II: Civil Service Reform, Regulation, Judiciary
- GS Paper -III: Tech missions, Defence Indigenisation, Atmanirbhar Bharat
- GS Paper -IV: Accountability, Ethics in governance
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2016] Civil Services “Traditional bureaucratic structure and culture have hampered the process of socio-economic development in India.” Comment.
Linkage: PM Modi’s Independence Day 2025 address highlighted that despite India’s technological advances, the colonial-era bureaucratic “steel frame” continues to obstruct innovation, investment, and governance reforms. The traditional bureaucratic structure—designed for control rather than development—remains a bottleneck in achieving Atmanirbhar Bharat. Thus, the speech directly echoes the UPSC 2016 theme that outdated bureaucratic culture hampers socio-economic transformation.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Introduction
Canada has decided to drop retaliatory tariffs and mirror the U.S. exemptions on goods covered under the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA). This represents a success in preserving tariff-free trade for over 85% of Canada-U.S. commerce. But sector-specific tariffs like the 50% duties on steel and aluminium continue to hurt Canadian industries. The development is crucial, given Canada’s heavy reliance on the U.S. market, with more than 75% of its exports heading south.
Significance of the News
- Tariff Alignment: Canada has chosen to align its tariff exemptions with those of the U.S., signaling a conciliatory move in contrast with earlier retaliatory tariffs.
- First-time Reset: For the first time since retaliatory duties were announced, Canada is rolling them back to match U.S. exemptions under USMCA, a notable policy reversal.
- Trade Dependence: With over 75% of Canadian exports going to the U.S., the stakes are extremely high, making tariff negotiations critical for economic stability.
- Striking Data: 85% of Canada-U.S. trade is still tariff-free, reflecting both success in negotiations and risks if the pact weakens.
What is USMCA?
- USMCA Pact: Signed in 2020, it replaced NAFTA and provides preferential treatment for Canadian and Mexican goods entering the U.S.
- Carve-out Mechanism: Goods shielded under the agreement are protected from punitive tariffs, preserving market access.
- Upcoming Review : The pact is up for review in 2026, adding urgency to Canada’s attempt to preserve smooth trade relations.
How does Canada benefit from this carve-out?
- Preferential Access: Canadian goods remain shielded from most punitive duties.
- Export Stability: With 75% of exports going to the U.S., the pact secures critical market access.
- Low Tariff Burden: U.S. average tariffs on Canadian goods remain among the lowest globally.
What are the challenges despite tariff exemptions?
- 232 Tariffs: The U.S. has imposed sector-specific duties, including 50% tariffs on steel and aluminium, straining Canadian industries.
- Renegotiation Risk: U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has hinted at reopening USMCA talks, creating uncertainty.
- Dependence Dilemma: Canada retains some retaliatory tariffs, but its heavy reliance on U.S. markets weakens bargaining power.
Why is this crucial for North American trade stability
- Export Dependence: More than 75% of Canada’s exports and 80% of Mexico’s exports head to the U.S., underlining their vulnerability.
- Regional Integration: The USMCA has reestablished tariff-free trade for the majority of goods, preventing economic disruption in North America.
- Geopolitical Context: At a time of growing global protectionism, North America’s internal trade pact provides a stabilising force, but also exposes Canada and Mexico to unilateral U.S. decisions.
Conclusion
Canada’s decision to align its tariffs with U.S. exemptions under USMCA reflects both pragmatism and vulnerability. While the pact secures tariff-free trade for the majority of goods, sector-specific tariffs and the looming threat of renegotiation highlight the fragile foundation of North American trade integration. For Canada, the challenge lies in balancing sovereignty with economic dependence, a dilemma increasingly relevant in today’s protectionist world.
Value Addition
|
United States–Mexico–Canada Agreement (USMCA)
Key Features (vs. NAFTA)
- Rules of Origin – Higher thresholds for auto production (75% North American content vs. 62.5% under NAFTA).
- Labour Provisions – Stronger labour standards; Mexico required to reform labour laws.
- Digital Trade – New rules on data flows, e-commerce, and IP rights absent in NAFTA.
- Sunset Clause – Agreement reviewed every 6 years; expires after 16 years unless renewed.
- Agriculture – U.S. gained greater access to Canadian dairy market.
|
PYQ Relevance
[UPSC 2018] How would the recent phenomena of protectionism and currency manipulations in world trade affect macroeconomic stability of India?
Linkage: The USMCA episode shows how U.S. protectionism through sectoral tariffs (like 50% on steel/aluminium) can destabilize even close trade partners like Canada. Such measures reflect the larger global trend of tariff wars and currency leverage, which disrupt supply chains and investment flows. For India, this highlights risks to macroeconomic stability via trade deficits, inflationary pressures, and exchange rate volatility.
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO) is developing its heaviest-ever rocket, the Lunar Module Launch Vehicle (LMLV).
About Lunar Module Launch Vehicle (LMLV):
- Overview: India’s heaviest rocket under development by the Indian Space Research Organisation (ISRO).
- Purpose: Designed mainly for lunar exploration, including India’s first human mission to the Moon by 2040.
- Strategic Role: Replaces the Next Generation Launch Vehicle (NGLV) plan and will support India’s space station programme.
- Scale: As tall as a 40-storey building, far larger than the current LVM-3.
Key Features:
- Payload Capacity: Can carry 80 tonnes to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) and 27 tonnes to the Moon, suitable for human-rated spacecraft.
- Three-stage: Partially reusable super heavy-lift vehicle with:
- First two stages using liquid propellants.
- Third stage using cryogenic propellant.
- Strap-on boosters taller than the entire LVM-3 rocket.
- 27 engines in the first stage (core + boosters).
- Timeline: Expected completion by 2035.
- Indigenous Development: Conceived by ISRO within months; aligned with India’s long-term space exploration goals.
Future Missions based on LMLV:
- Human Lunar Mission (2040 target): Capable of carrying 18–20 tonne crew modules for India’s first astronaut landing on the Moon.
- Bharatiya Antariksh Station (BAS): Will deploy heavy modules for India’s planned five-module space station by 2035.
- Lunar Cargo Missions: Can transport ~27 tonnes to the Moon, supporting logistics and lunar infrastructure.
- Deep Space Exploration: Its heavy-lift capacity could enable interplanetary missions in the 2040s, extending beyond lunar exploration.
| [UPSC 2018] With reference to India’s satellite launch vehicles, consider the following statements:
1.PSLVs launch the satellites useful for Earth resources monitoring whereas GSLVs are designed mainly to launch communication satellites.
2.Satellites launched by PSLV appear to remain permanently fixed in the same position in the sky, as viewed from a particular location on Earth.
3.GSLV Mk III is a four-stage launch vehicle with the first and third stages using solid rocket motors, and the second and fourth stages using liquid rocket engines.
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?
Options: (a) 1 only* (b) 2 and 3 (c) 1 and 2 (d) 3 only |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
The United Nations has officially declared a famine in Gaza based on an Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC) panel assessment.
About Integrated Food Security Phase Classification (IPC):
- What It Is: A global standard tool to assess and classify the severity of food insecurity.
- Established: In 2004 during the Somalia food crisis by FEWS NET (Famine Early Warning Systems Network) and partners.
- Coordination: Led by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO).
- Purpose: Supports early warning, evidence-based decision-making, and coordinated response by governments, UN agencies, NGOs, and donors.
- Partnership Model: Combines efforts of UN bodies, NGOs, academic institutions, and national governments.
Key Features of the IPC:
- Five-Phase Classification System:
- Phase 1: Minimal
- Phase 2: Stressed
- Phase 3: Crisis
- Phase 4: Emergency
- Phase 5: Catastrophe/Famine
- Methodology:
- Uses convergence of evidence from food access, livelihoods, nutrition, and mortality.
- Requires technical consensus among analysts for transparency and accuracy.
- Allows real-time assessments and 6-month forecasts to support timely action.
What is Famine and How is it Declared?
- Definition: IPC Phase 5 – the most extreme level of food insecurity.
- Criteria (All Must Be Met):
- At least 20% of households face extreme food gaps.
- At least 30% of children under five suffer acute malnutrition (wasting).
- Death rate: 2 adults or 4 children per 10,000 people per day.
- Declaration: Made by UN agencies, national governments, or authorized global bodies.
- Purpose of Declaration:
- Mobilize international aid and emergency operations.
- Trigger food, health, and logistics support.
- Raise global awareness and funding for urgent interventions.
- Past Declarations: Somalia (2011), South Sudan (2017, 2020), Darfur, Sudan (2024)
| [UPSC 2023] Which of the following countries has been suffering from decades of civil strife and food shortages and was in news in the recent past for its very severe famine?
Options: (a) Angola (b) Costa Rica (c) Ecuador (d) Somalia* |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
India has rejected Nepal’s objection to resumption of India–China border trade through the Lipulekh Pass in Uttarakhand.
About Lipulekh Pass:
- Location: High-altitude Himalayan pass (~17,000 ft) near the trijunction of India, Nepal, and China (Tibet).
- Connectivity: Links Uttarakhand’s Kumaon region with Taklakot in Tibet.
- Cultural Role: Serves as the shortest route for the Kailash Mansarovar Yatra.
- Trade Importance: Historic India–China trade route since 1954; disrupted during COVID-19 but later resumed.
- Strategic Significance: Crucial for India due to its proximity to the India–China–Nepal border.
What is Limpiyadhura–Lipulekh–Kalapani Dispute?
- Origin: Rooted in the 1815 Treaty of Sugauli (Nepal–British East India Company), fixing Nepal’s western boundary at the Kali (Mahakali) River.
- India’s Position: Claims Kali River originates near Lipulekh, placing Lipulekh and Kalapani within India.
- Nepal’s Position: Claims Kali River originates at Limpiyadhura, extending Nepal’s boundary east to include Lipulekh and Kalapani.
- Disputed Area: About 370 sq. km., under Indian administration since the 19th century.
- Recent Development: In 2020, Nepal issued a new map showing Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh, and Kalapani as its territory; India rejected the claim citing lack of historical basis.
Back2Basics: India–Nepal Border Disputes
- Border Length: India and Nepal share a 1,770 km long open border across five Indian states – Uttarakhand, Uttar Pradesh, Bihar, West Bengal, and Sikkim.
- Key Disputes:
- Kalapani–Lipulekh–Limpiyadhura (Uttarakhand): Discussed above.
- Susta (Uttar Pradesh–Nepal border): Caused by Gandak River’s shifting course, leading to encroachments and overlapping claims.
- Tensions: Despite close ties, disputes often cause diplomatic strains.
- Positions: India relies on historical treaties and long-standing administration, while Nepal asserts sovereignty and constitutional recognition of disputed territories.
|
| [UPSC 2007] Which one of the following Himalayan passes was reopened around in the middle of the year 2006 to facilitate trade between India and China?
Options : (a) Chang La (b) Jara La (c) Nathu La* (d) Shipki La |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
Why in the News?
A recent movie depicted the 1946 “Great Calcutta Killing” — four days of communal riots on Direct Action Day (August 16, 1946), spotlighting Gopal Patha’s role in mobilising Hindu youth.
About Direct Action Day:
- Declaration: Called by the All-India Muslim League to press for Partition and creation of Pakistan.
- Bengal Role: Muslim League’s H. S. Suhrawardy (then Bengal Premier) declared 16 August a public holiday.
- Mass Rally: Nearly 1,00,000 gathered at the Maidan, Calcutta; addressed by Suhrawardy and Khwaja Nazimuddin.
- Violence: Immediate communal clashes broke out, remembered as the Great Calcutta Killing.
- Casualties: 5,000–10,000 killed; ~15,000 injured.
- Spread: Violence lasted four days (16–19 August), army intervention required; later spread to Bombay, Noakhali, Bihar, Punjab.
Who was Gopal Patha (Gopal Mukherjee)?
- Background: Born 1916 in Bowbazar, Calcutta; nicknamed Patha (goat) since family ran a College Street mutton shop.
- Gang Leader: Headed a street group of ~800 men; mobilized masses for defense during riots.
- Approach: Declared aim was to retaliate against rioters but forbade harm to women, children, or ordinary people.
- Links: Associated with revolutionary groups like Atma Unnati Samiti; influenced by Subhas Chandra Bose.
| [UPSC 2002] The last opportunity to avoid the partition of India was lost with the rejection of:
Options: (a) Cripps Mission (b) Rajagopalachari Formula (c) Cabinet Mission* (d) Wavell Plan |
Get an IAS/IPS ranker as your 1: 1 personal mentor for UPSC 2024
Attend Now
