In an unprecedented review, the Karnataka High Court has stayed proceedings of a trial court case after it was discovered that the judge cited non-existent judgments from the Supreme Court and High Court in a commercial dispute involving Sammaan Capital Limited and Mantri Infrastructure Private Limited.
The issue came to light during a hearing on Tuesday when the High Court addressed a petition filed by Sammaan Capital, a non-banking finance company. The petition challenges a trial court’s November 25, 2024 order which denied their application for the return of a plaint, allegedly citing fictitious legal precedents.
Senior advocate Prabhuling K Navadgi, representing Sammaan Capital, argued before Justice R Devdas that the trial court’s decision relied on fabricated case citations, pointing out a grave concern regarding the accuracy of legal references in judicial decisions. The cited cases include M/s. Jalan Trading Co., Pvt. Ltd. Vs Millenium Telecom Ltd. and two others, which Navadgi claims do not exist in any official legal records.
The Karnataka High Court has paused further action by the trial court until the next hearing scheduled for February 5, with the legal community closely watching the implications this case could have on the integrity of judicial reliance on AI-generated legal research.
The revelation has sparked a broader discussion about the role and reliability of AI in legal research among the legal fraternity. Supreme Court lawyer Vamshi Polsani criticized the reliance on AI for legal judgments, emphasizing that “A lawyer’s analysis, research, and framing of arguments cannot be delegated to software or technology.” Advocate Vishwaja Rao and former Telangana High Court judge Challa Kodanda Ram also weighed in, highlighting the need for accuracy and the potential pitfalls of AI in legal processes.
