Ahmedabad, April 5 -- The Gujarat high court on Saturday issued a policy regulating the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in judicial and court administration, stating that AI cannot be used for adjudication processes, including judicial decision-making, drafting of judgments or orders and evaluation of evidence, holding judges personally responsible for all orders and judgments issued in their names. The policy titled 'Policy on the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Judicial and Court Administration', stated that while artificial intelligence can improve efficiency, research and administrative functioning, the core function of adjudication, must remain with judges. "The core of adjudication, the weighing of evidence, interpretation of law, application of legal principles to facts, exercise of discretion, and delivery of reasoned decisions belongs exclusively to the domain of the human mind," it stated. The policy stated the prohibition of using AI for judicial decision-making, judicial reasoning, order or judgment drafting, bail or sentencing considerations, interpretation of facts, weighing of arguments, determination of rights and liabilities, interim orders or final judgments. Additionally, the policy has strictly barred entering of confidential court data into public AI tools, including names and addresses of parties or witnesses, details of pending proceedings, privileged communications, sensitive personal data such as health or financial information and any evidence or documents filed in a case. It also prohibits using AI to fabricate or alter evidence or relying on AI-generated citations without independent verification from authoritative legal sources. This comes after the Supreme Court on February 27 took exception to a trial court order that cited fake judgments generated using AI, warning that decisions based on "non-existence" and "fake" judgments would amount to misconduct. However, the high court has permitted limited use of AI for administrative and research purposes, including retrieving judgments and identifying precedents and improving language and structure of drafts where the legal reasoning remains that of the judge. Violation of any provision of the policy will be treated as misconduct and may lead to departmental or disciplinary proceedings, apart from any civil or criminal liability under applicable laws. The policy will remain in force until revised in accordance with directions issued by the Supreme Court or future policy decisions....