Artificial Intelligence And Legal Accountability In India: A Socio-Legal Perspective On Emerging Regulatory Challenges
- IJLLR Journal
- Nov 10
- 2 min read
Joylin Jacob Y, Ancy Dorshia M & Aalan Joe Edwin
ABSTRACT
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is reshaping governance, commerce, public services and social life in India. Its deployment across healthcare, finance, criminal justice, social welfare distribution, surveillance, and digital platforms raises pressing questions of accountability, fairness, transparency, and human rights. This paper examines the socio-legal landscape of AI accountability in India: it surveys existing statutes and policy, examines judicial responses relevant to automated decision-making and data protection, identifies contemporary legal and socio-ethical challenges, and proposes a forward-looking regulatory architecture adapted to Indian constitutional and developmental realities. India already possesses building blocks relevant to AI governance the Information Technology Act, sectoral laws, and (since 2023) the Digital Personal Data Protection Act plus policy articulations such as NITI Aayog’s National Strategy on AI. Landmark Supreme Court jurisprudence on privacy (Justice K.S. Puttaswamy) and intermediary liability (Shreya Singhal) shape the constitutional contours of AI regulation. However, gaps remain: (1) no single statutory regime explicitly governs algorithmic accountability or high-risk AI systems; (2) enforcement architecture for auditing, transparency, and contestability of automated decisions is weak; (3) marginalized groups face disproportionate risks from biased models and opaque platforms; and (4) state uses of AI for surveillance and welfare delivery present due-process and discrimination risks.
This paper argues for a layered regulatory model combining (i) a core federal statute addressing automated decision-making, explainability, and redress; (ii) strong data protection and sectoral AI standards; (iii) independent auditing and a certified regulator with rule-making and enforcement powers; and (iv) judicial and administrative remedies that preserve fundamental rights. The recommendations emphasize proportionality, human-in-the-loop safeguards, public-interest algorithmic impact assessments, capacity building, and multi-stakeholder governance. The paper concludes that legal accountability for AI in India must blend constitutional rights protection with regulatory agility to enable socially beneficial innovation while preventing systemic harms.
Keywords: Artificial Intelligence (AI); Legal Accountability; Socio-Legal Framework; Algorithmic Governance; Data Protection; Privacy; Transparency; Bias and Discrimination; Digital India; Constitutional Rights; Fundamental Rights; Puttaswamy Judgment; Shreya Singhal Case; Automated Decision-Making; Regulatory Challenges; AI Ethics; Governance and Technology; Human Rights; Digital Transformation; India.
