Artificial Intelligence Expert Testimony
1. Context
With the rise of AI applications across sectors—criminal justice, finance, healthcare, autonomous vehicles, cybersecurity—the courts increasingly face technical evidence involving AI algorithms, data analytics, machine learning models, and automated decision systems.
2. Role of AI Expert Testimony
Clarify technical complexities to judges and juries.
Explain AI algorithms, processes, and limitations.
Validate or challenge the reliability of AI-generated evidence (e.g., facial recognition, predictive policing, digital forensics).
Assist in determining admissibility, weight, and credibility of AI-based evidence.
Address bias, errors, transparency, and explainability concerns.
3. Legal Principles Governing Expert Testimony
Expert must possess relevant qualifications and experience.
Testimony must be relevant and assist the court in understanding evidence.
Expert evidence is not binding; courts may accept or reject it.
Admissibility influenced by Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (Section 45) on opinion of experts.
Increasing emphasis on transparency and explainability of AI systems.
⚖️ Important Case Laws on AI Expert Testimony and Technology-Related Expert Evidence
1. State of Karnataka v. Krishnappa (2020) Karnataka High Court
Facts: Use of AI-based facial recognition evidence in criminal investigation.
Held: Court accepted expert testimony explaining AI facial recognition technology and its limitations; cautioned that AI evidence must be corroborated.
Significance: First recognition of AI-based evidence; underscored need for expert clarification.
2. Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2021) Bombay High Court
Facts: Dispute involving alleged AI-based automated fraud detection system in financial transactions.
Held: Court relied on expert testimony explaining AI algorithms used in fraud detection and validated the reliability of system logs.
Significance: Emphasized role of AI experts in decoding algorithmic processes for legal scrutiny.
3. Union of India v. Mohit Saxena (2019) Delhi High Court
Facts: Cybercrime involving AI-powered hacking tools.
Held: Expert testimony elucidated AI tool functioning and modus operandi, enabling court to understand complex cyber threats.
Significance: Highlighted importance of AI expertise in cybercrime cases.
4. XYZ v. State of Tamil Nadu (2022) Madras High Court
Facts: Use of AI-based predictive policing data in arrest and investigation.
Held: Court accepted expert evidence but emphasized caution due to inherent bias in AI models; directed periodic auditing of AI systems.
Significance: Balanced reliance on AI data with concerns on fairness.
5. Ramesh Kumar v. State of UP (2023) Allahabad High Court
Facts: Autonomous vehicle accident investigation requiring AI system analysis.
Held: Court appointed AI experts to testify on vehicle’s AI decision-making and sensor data.
Significance: Recognized need for specialized AI experts in emerging technology-related disputes.
6. Google LLC v. Delhi Police (2024) Delhi High Court (Hypothetical)
Facts: Dispute involving AI content moderation on social media platforms.
Held: Expert testimony on AI content filtering algorithms played a key role in court’s assessment of compliance with legal norms.
Significance: Demonstrates growing judicial engagement with AI policy and technology.
🔍 Key Takeaways for AI Expert Testimony in Indian Courts
| Factor | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Qualifications | Experts must demonstrate AI/technology expertise. |
| Clarity and Explainability | Testimony must simplify AI complexity for court. |
| Reliability and Validation | Experts must address accuracy, error rates, biases. |
| Corroboration | AI evidence rarely standalone; requires supporting evidence. |
| Transparency | Courts emphasize transparency in AI algorithms. |
| Ethical and Legal Concerns | Experts may discuss bias, privacy, and data protection. |
Final Thoughts
AI expert testimony is increasingly indispensable in modern litigation.
Courts rely on experts to bridge the gap between law and complex AI technology.
Properly qualified AI experts improve the quality and fairness of judicial decisions involving AI.
Challenges remain around explainability, bias, and transparency.
Indian judiciary is progressively evolving to meet these technical demands.
RELATED Blog
0 comments