Assembled draft appears here in court format — fully editable, so the final draft can be completed right here before Word export.
| Value up to ₹ (0 = above all) | Rate % | Plus fixed ₹ |
|---|
| Item | ₹ |
|---|
| English | Malayalam |
|---|
Mask names (toolbar): party names from the cause title are replaced with placeholders before sending and restored in the result, so the provider never receives them. Common Malayalam case endings are handled, but an unusual inflection can still slip a name through — and the facts themselves always go out. Masking reduces exposure; it does not make the text anonymous.
Assemble without AI sends nothing at all. Use it for sensitive matters.
Case law is blocked. The AI is instructed never to cite judgments, and anything resembling a citation is stripped from its output before you see it. Statutory provisions are suggested for your verification; decided cases must be cited by you from the law report.
Before deploying to an office: route API calls through your own proxy with logging disabled, and tell clients in writing that AI-assisted drafting is used.
Section 480 BNSS [UNVERIFIED — check the bare Act] so it cannot reach a court unnoticed.| Old (CrPC) | New (BNSS) | Subject | Verified |
|---|
The Supreme Court of India has held that citing an AI-generated judgment without verifying it is professional misconduct. In Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd., 2026 INSC 668 (2 July 2026) the Court directed a “zero-tolerance mode” for producing, citing or using AI-generated precedents without verification, held that a decision resting on hallucinated material is “no decision in the eyes of the law”, and said such a decision is to be set aside even if an iota of fabricated material entered the reasoning. It has directed the Bar Council of India to constitute a committee on advocates placing fake material before courts.
AI models do not look case law up. They predict text that looks like a citation. A fabricated citation carries a real-sounding party name, a correctly shaped citation and a confident ratio — and nothing on its face tells you it does not exist.
Everything this page produces is a research lead, not an authority. Nothing here is inserted into your pleading. Open each judgment in SCC Online, Manupatra, the official reports or Indian Kanoon, read it, and only then write the citation into your draft by hand.
Two ways to work, both safe by design:
Search real sources — the model is required to search live judgment sources and may report a citation
only if it gives you the page it retrieved it from. A citation offered without a source URL is discarded by
this tool before you ever see it. This is the recommended mode.
Propositions only — the model is forbidden to name any judgment at all. It tells you which propositions
need authority and what to search for; you find the case. Nothing can be fabricated because nothing is asked for.
The Supreme Court’s Draft Regulations for the Use of Artificial Intelligence in Courts, 2026 (released 3 June 2026 for consultation) propose that the AI-assisted character of a document be disclosed to the court when it is submitted. They are a draft, not yet binding. If you wish to disclose, this wording is a starting point — settle your own form with your senior.