Justice Manmohan urges constructive court criticism, warns against reckless tech

Supreme Court Justice Manmohan said criticism of India’s legal system should be constructive, not condemnation, and said technology must be used responsibly.

Manmohan’s remarks come at a time when public confidence in the judiciary is being tested by high‑profile cases and a growing perception that courts are out of touch. By urging critics to frame their observations as reform proposals, he hopes to foster a dialogue that can lead to procedural improvements, greater transparency, and stronger rule of law. The stance also signals the court’s openness to external input while maintaining the authority of judicial decision‑making.

Speaking to reporters, the justice said that criticism should be a catalyst for change. “Criticism of the existing legal system should be viewed as a suggestion for improvement rather than a condemnation,” he said. He said, “Criticism of the existing system should not be treated as condemnation.” He said that such feedback can help identify procedural gaps and inspire legislative action.

Manmohan also said that technology, while a powerful aid, can become a double‑edged sword if relied upon without human oversight. “The ultimate decision must rest with the human mind. But technology should be used as a tool,” he said. He said that unchecked algorithms could erode judicial independence and undermine public trust.

The justice’s comments arrive as India debates the integration of artificial intelligence in case management and evidence analysis. Lawmakers and bar associations have called for clear guidelines to prevent bias and ensure accountability. By framing criticism as constructive and urging responsible tech use, Manmohan seeks to balance innovation with the core principle that final judgments belong to the human judiciary.

Legal scholars have largely welcomed the call for constructive critique. Professor Ananya Singh of Delhi University said that open debate is essential for a living constitution, and said that technology can enhance efficiency if deployed with safeguards. Conversely, some activist groups argue that the judiciary must do more to address systemic delays and that the warning on technology should be accompanied by concrete policy proposals.

The Supreme Court is slated to hold a conference on judicial reform later this year, where the chief justice is expected to address the role of digital tools in case adjudication. Manmohan’s remarks are likely to shape the agenda, encouraging panels to explore standards for algorithmic transparency, and mechanisms for public input on procedural changes.

In sum, Justice Manmohan’s appeal underscores a dual priority: fostering a culture where critique drives improvement, and ensuring that emerging technologies augment rather than replace human judgment. The judiciary’s response will influence public perception of its adaptability and its commitment to upholding justice in a digital age.