Dangerous to use AI to write judgments: Karnataka High Court in X challenge to Sahyog portal

Justice M Nagaprasanna of the Karnataka High Court on Wednesday issued a strong caution against the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in judicial decision-making, calling it a serious threat to the legal profession.

“The most dangerous thing is using AI to draft or write judgments,” the judge said during a hearing in X Corp’s challenge to the Centre’s ‘Sahyog’ portal, which enables content takedown orders allegedly without following the safeguards under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the government, flagged real-life instances where lawyers used AI-generated content in court.

“There are cases where lawyers start using AI for research, and artificial intelligence has an inbuilt difficulty—it hallucinates,” he said.

In one such case, a lawyer had to admit that AI fabricated a judgment under his client’s name, he said. The SG also referred to an instance where fake citations were used to seek costs in litigation.

Justice Nagaprasanna expressed serious concern, saying,

“Too much dependence on that is dangerous, and that’s going to destroy the profession itself...Dependence on artificial intelligence should not make your intelligence artificial,” the judge cautioned.

The observations came amidst broader arguments on algorithmic profiling, misinformation and the limits of intermediary protections under the IT Act.

On the merits of the case, SG Mehta argued that intermediaries like X are not passive platforms but entities that profit from user profiling, targeted content and algorithmic amplification. He maintained that notifying intermediaries of unlawful content does not violate free speech rights, and that the safeguards under Section 69A are not undermined by the Sahyog system. He added that the legal environment today is vastly different from what existed at the time of the Shreya Singhal ruling.

The Court also discussed the growing influence of clickbait-driven content, misinformation and the need to strike a balance between freedom of expression and public interest.

The hearing will resume on Friday.

X Corp approached the Karnataka High Court challenging the Central government's ‘Sahyog’ portal, a platform that enables Central and state agencies to issue content-blocking orders. X contends that the portal bypasses the safeguards mandated under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and violates the Supreme Court’s ruling in Shreya Singhal v. Union of India.

The company alleges that the government is misusing Section 79(3)(b) of the IT Act - meant to define intermediary liability - to create an unlawful parallel mechanism for takedowns. The petition was filed after multiple takedown orders were issued by the Ministry of Railways following posts about a stampede at New Delhi Railway Station.

According to X, MeitY has instructed agencies to issue orders via a “template blocking order” on the Sahyog portal, circumventing the due process required under Section 69A.

X has sought a declaration that Section 79(3)(b) does not authorise such orders, quashing of the impugned directions and interim relief to prevent coercive action.