Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
K NARANJAN RAO vs UNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS - Telangana (2022)
"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 42557"], ["2025 0 Supreme(Raj) 1961"].Miscellaneous references include procedural aspects like transcription accuracy, avoiding dictation errors, and ensuring discretion in judicial decisions without external influence ["
K NARANJAN RAO vs UNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS - Telangana (2022)
"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 42557"], ["2024 Supreme(Online)(Tel) 42557"].Analysis and Conclusion
In the fast-evolving landscape of judicial technology, AI tools are transforming how courts handle transcription and translation. But what about Supreme Today AI Dictation? Many legal professionals and court staff wonder: How to Use Supreme Today AI Dictation effectively while ensuring compliance with legal standards? While no explicit procedural manual exists in key judicial documents, recent insights and related cases provide a framework for cautious adoption. This post explores the legal principles, best practices, and recommendations to integrate AI dictation tools seamlessly into court proceedings.
Important Disclaimer: This article offers general information based on available judicial documents and is not legal advice. Consult qualified legal experts for specific implementations.
Indian courts are increasingly embracing AI to enhance efficiency. The has pioneered tools like the Vidhik Anuvaad Software (SUVAS), an AI-based platform for translating judgments. As noted in key documents, The of India has devised an Artificial Intelligence (AI) tool- Vidhik Anuvaad Software (SUVAS), which has been made available to all the for translating their judgments. 2025 0 Supreme(SC) 1533
This precedent extends to transcription, including potential uses for Supreme Today AI Dictation. Courts recognize AI's role in translation and transcription, but stress human oversight. For instance, timely transcription is vital, with suggestions for technological upgrades: It is hence expedient that the provides for computers inside the Court Hall for the purpose of dictation to be taken down as the examination of a witness proceeds. 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 611
No specific provision details step-by-step usage of Supreme Today AI Dictation. However, core principles from documents guide its application:
These points underscore AI as a supportive tool, not a standalone solution.
Reliability is paramount in judicial records. AI-generated dictation, like Supreme Today AI, requires rigorous vetting to prevent errors. The principle from SUVAS applies broadly: human translators or stenographers must review outputs.
Related cases reinforce this. In shorthand dictation exams, courts noted issues with longhand use, emphasizing fidelity to spoken words: the deduction of marks for the use of longhand/first taking the same in longhand the dictation is taken in longhand, the same was not required to shorthand especially written from dictation.
This highlights the need for precise capture, whether manual or AI-assisted.
Moreover, in document scribing, scribes must use exact words: He must faithfully use the words and expressions of the person giving the dictation. 2008 0 Supreme(Del) 634 AI tools should mirror this fidelity, with verification to uphold authenticity.
While detailed protocols are absent, practical steps emerge from judicial recommendations:
In practice, courts have posted matters for dictation, reserving orders if counsel is absent, showing procedural flexibility adaptable to AI. 2022 0 Supreme(Raj) 745
Broader case law illustrates dictation challenges and tech solutions:
These cases emphasize AI's role in speeding processes—like resolving road accident claims within 30 days—while maintaining integrity. 2021 0 Supreme(Del) 319
In claims, can convert petitions, showing procedural adaptability that AI could enhance. 2008 0 Supreme(Bom) 829
Delays in disputes or irregular engagements highlight practical hurdles AI must address without compromising justice. 2018 0 Supreme(Guj) 596
To leverage Supreme Today AI Dictation:- Pilot Programs: Start with vetted trials, like SUVAS expansions.- Hybrid Models: Combine AI with stenographers for hybrid accuracy.- Tech Infrastructure: Install court hall computers for seamless integration. 2021 0 Supreme(Ker) 611- Policy Development: Follow AI Committee leads for nationwide protocols. 2021 0 Supreme(Del) 319
As courts evolve, AI promises faster, accurate records, reducing backlogs.
In summary, while direct guidance on How to Use Supreme Today AI Dictation is limited, the legal framework supports its adoption with safeguards. This balanced approach upholds justice in the digital age.
#SupremeCourtAI,#AICourtTools,#LegalTechIndia
Petitioner intends to prefer an appeal before the Supreme Court. Since copies of the depositions of the trial court are indecipherable, he applied to the Sessions Court to provide him with legible copies of the depositions. ... Section 311 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 also permits the Sessions Courts to record evidence of witnesses by dictation in open court. ... Rule 56A(2)(b) of the Criminal Rules of Practice, 1982 permits the evidence of each witness to be taken down through dictation onto a mechanical or electronic ....
Petitioner intends to prefer an appeal before the Supreme Court. Since copies of the depositions of the trial court are indecipherable, he applied to the Sessions Court to provide him with legible copies of the depositions. ... Section 311 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 also permits the Sessions Courts to record evidence of witnesses by dictation in open court. ... Appropriate training must also be provided to the Judicial Officers to enable them to use the advantages of technology. 14. ... Appropriate training must also ....
Notwithstanding to that, upon the commencement of the dictation, the invigilators in the examination rooms were murmuring while roaming around the hall as if the candidates were participating in a written examination on the basis of written question papers, thereby disrupting the applicants use of keyboards ... C.] [01.09.2014] the Supreme Court considered various decisions and surmised the position as under:- “30. ... It was clearly mentioned that the dictation of 10 minutes will be given @ 120 words per minute. Thereaf....
only in shorthand, the deduction of marks for the use of longhand/first taking the same in longhand the dictation is taken in longhand, the same was not required to shorthand especially written from dictation or The very fact that while taking dictation, the petitioner/candidate did not take the dictation/part of it in shorthand and noted the
Shri Atul Babasaheb Dakh, learned counsel further submits that even the questions of law which were framed by the learned Trial Judge were framed during the dictation of the order and the appellant herein did not have an opportunity of being heard. 4. ... Since the appeal arises out of a suit filed in the year 2009, we request the High Court to decide the appeal expeditiously, preferably within a period of one year from today. 7. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. 8. ... Sumanbai Pandurang Petkar and Others, reported in 2023 SCC OnLine SC 1210 : 2023 8 #....
Counsel has submitted that he is practicing in Supreme court and several opportunities are being given in the Supreme Court for arguments in the interest of justice. ... At this stage, counsel for the defendant has been asked to argue this case at 2pm or 3pm or even 4pm today itself. He has expressed his inability to address his arguments today. The arguments will be heard today only. ... 8.2 In the present case, it is highly deplorable that despite being asked to calm down, learned counsel for pet....
Maharani Rajlaxmi Kumari Devi, [(1989) 2 Supreme Court Cases 505] 4. ... It is also evident from the impugned order that no charge memo has been issued to the petitioner as on today. ... That authority must genuinely address itself to the matter before it: it must not act under the dictation of another body or disable itself from exercising a discretion in each individual case. ... The authority cannot permit its decision to be influenced by the dictation of others as this would amount to abdication and surrender of its ....
Maharani Rajlaxmi Kumari Devi, [(1989) 2 Supreme Court Cases 505] 4. ... It is also evident from the impugned order that no charge memo has been issued to the petitioner as on today. ... That authority must genuinely address itself to the matter before it: it must not act under the dictation of another body or disable itself from exercising a discretion in each individual case. ... The authority cannot permit its decision to be influenced by the dictation of others as this would amount to abdication and surrender of its ....
The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in Swapnil Tripathi Vs. ... It was specifically held in para No.154 that Supreme Court shall hold exclusive copyright over re-use, capture, reediting or re-distribution of such videos streamed on-line and archived with the Registry. The said paragraph reads as under:- “154. ... the terms and conditions of use and without the written permission of the Registry.” ... The Supreme Court shall hold exclusive copyright over videos streamed online are archived with the Regist....
(2) Wrong use of capital or small letters. (3) Wrong indentation of paragraph. (2) The margin of 5% mistakes may be allowed. ... PaperDurationSpeed of dictationMarks1-Dictation of passage6 Minutes70 words per minute1002-Transcription and typing of Dictated passage in Hindi on Computer. ... PaperDurationSpeed of dictationMarks1-Dictation of passage6 Minutes80 words per minute1002-Transcription and typing of Dictated passage in English on Computer. ... Reference in this regard be made upon judgment of th....
The matters were posted for dictation of order today. Since, significant judicial time had already been consumed in hearing the cases in pre-lunch session, the Court proceeded to hear the arguments of the respondents’ counsel and thereafter, waited for the petitioner’s counsel to appear but he did not turn up in the Court till the Board was finished and the Court rose for the day and accordingly, the order was reserved in both the writ petitions giving liberty to the petitioner’s counsel to submit written submissions.
The Supreme Court has directed the Delhi High Court model to be implemented all over the country. A Sub Committee was formed by the AI Committee of Supreme Court under Chairmanship of Hon’ble Mr. Justice DN Patel, with HMJ Midha, Retd. Justice K. Kannan as its Member and Sh. Surinder S Rathi as its Convener. 7. In the meanwhile, AI Committee of Supreme Court of India resolved to use Artificial Intelligence in MACT.
Though learned advocate for respondent has filed leave note, in view of the fact that learned advocates for both sides have already concluded their submissions the Court proceeds to dictate the order. 1.1 Learned advocates had concluded their submissions yesterday i.e. on 13.6.2018. However for dictation of order the petition came to be adjourned today.
Today the appeal is kept for dictation of the judgment. Considering the controversy involved, the appeal was taken up for final hearing at admission stage.
He must faithfully use the words and expressions of the person giving the dictation. Obviously, the scribe of the document has used his expressions and not those of Jitni, if at all, Jitni told him what to write. Now, if a document is dictated by a person to a scribe, the scribe cannot rephrase what is dictated to him.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
