Citing AI-Generated Fake Precedents Is Advocate Misconduct; Judgments Based On Them Are Void : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has taken a strong stance against the use of AI-generated fake judicial precedents, emphasizing the need for a zero-tolerance approach towards this issue. According to the Court, it is the responsibility of advocates to verify the authenticity of judgments before citing them, and failure to do so constitutes professional misconduct. The Court's warning comes as a reminder to judges to exercise caution when relying on precedents, as citing non-existent ones can have serious consequences. The Court's decision highlights the importance of ensuring the integrity of the judicial process, and the need for all stakeholders to be vigilant in preventing the use of fake or hallucinated judicial precedents. The Court's stance is clear: judgments based on AI-generated fake precedents are void, and it is the duty of advocates and judges to prevent such instances from occurring. The Supreme Court's ruling is expected to have significant implications for the legal profession, as it emphasizes the need for accuracy and verification in legal proceedings. The Court's warning to judges to be cautious when relying on precedents is a reminder that the judiciary must remain vigilant in upholding the integrity of the legal system. By taking a strong stance against AI-generated fake judicial precedents, the Supreme Court is sending a clear message that such practices will not be tolerated.