Trial court, Andhra Pradesh — order reviewed by the Supreme Court of India
Gummadi Usha Rani & Anr v. Sure Mallikarjuna Rao & Anr, SLP(C) No. 7575/2026
Sanctioned · 27 February 2026
What was fabricated
Four judgments cited by the trial court in dismissing objections to an Advocate Commissioner's Report did not exist. AI causation is established by a judicial finding: the High Court "realized that the judgments are Artificial Intelligence (AI) generated", as recorded by the Supreme Court. The fabricator here is a judge, not counsel.
What happened as a result
Bench of Narasimha and Aradhe JJ, order of 27 February 2026. The Court: "a decision based on such non-existent and fake alleged judgments is not an error in the decision making. It would be a misconduct and legal consequence shall follow." The trial court was directed not to proceed on the basis of the Advocate Commissioner's Report; notice was issued to the Attorney General, the Solicitor General and the Bar Council of India; senior counsel Mr Shyam Divan was appointed to assist the Court. NOTE: the consequence is judicial intervention and institutional referral rather than a personal sanction — the four-value consequence ladder has no closer term.
Sources
Every incident is confirmed against at least one reputable source (mainstream news, legal/official, or the organisation itself). Nothing unverifiable is listed. Accuracy is non-negotiable — Ukweli is a truth product.