Artificial intelligence is being embedded across sectors, from healthcare and manufacturing to finance, education, and governance, reshaping how data-heavy work is carried out. In healthcare, AI supports faster diagnostics and predictive analysis. Financial institutions use automation for fraud detection, compliance monitoring, and real-time risk assessment, while manufacturers rely on AI-driven systems for supply chain optimisation and predictive maintenance.
This shift is now evident in legal and corporate governance functions as well, where the scale of documentation, precedents, and regulatory data makes automation increasingly relevant.
The growing use of AI in legal processes has raised a critical question in India: whether automation can be safely integrated into a system governed by one of the lengthiest constitutions in the world. Legal experts note that while technology can significantly improve efficiency, the interpretative, ethical, and contextual nature of law demands firm boundaries on where and how AI is applied.
Can AI take legal jobs?
AI’s rapid expansion has also sparked concerns about job losses across IT and allied sectors. Similar anxieties have emerged in legal support roles, particularly in functions involving repetitive analysis, documentation, and data review. Senior professionals, however, caution against viewing AI as a substitute for human expertise.
A senior legal counsel from Tata Steel told Firstpost, “When we talk of legal AI, it can be an assistance but never a master. We need to master AI.” He explained that existing systems face clear restraints, especially around accuracy, accountability, and the ability to understand context.
Asked how AI is changing everyday legal work inside major companies and which tasks that once took days can now be completed in minutes, the senior counsel said, “AI is increasingly used to analyse and summarise large volumes of data.”
He noted that contract reviews, compliance checks, regulatory mapping, and internal audits can now be processed at much greater speed. This has reduced turnaround times and allowed legal teams to spend more time on advisory work, risk assessment, and strategic decision-making rather than manual data sorting.
Will AI replace legal jobs?
On whether AI will eventually replace legal jobs or act mainly as a support tool, he said, “Not all, but we can say jobs of analysts or jobs where human skills like emotional intelligence aren’t required.”
Roles suited to automation include those dependent on pattern recognition, high-volume review, and data comparison, while work involving judgment, negotiation, ethics, and discretion remains firmly human-led.
Risks of AI-driven legal decisions
Explaining the risks of relying on AI for legal decisions, he said, “The biggest risk is the quantum of data fed to AI and the output we receive… accuracy and factual AI also hallucinate and can cause hurdles.”
He said that flawed inputs or unchecked system behaviour could lead to incorrect outcomes, underlining the need for constant human oversight and verification.
On regulation, he said professionals need to be upskilled and new rules introduced, warning that existing laws do not fully address AI-related risks such as data breaches and misuse. He stressed the need to revise legal education to include structured courses on AI, noting that many laws predate artificial intelligence and are not equipped to deal with its impact. He also said intellectual property laws must be updated to remain aligned with AI-driven innovation.
AI in legal proceedings
In a conversation with Firstpost, advocate and legal practitioner at the Supreme Court of India, Jayant Sinha, explained how AI is currently being used in legal work and the challenges that remain.
He said AI mainly assists with tasks involving reading, sorting, and analysing large volumes of text. “AI-powered legal research tools can quickly retrieve relevant cases, laws, and precedents, scanning thousands of pages and highlighting key issues within minutes. AI also supports drafting and summarising by preparing initial drafts of contracts or briefs and condensing lengthy case files. This reduces the time lawyers spend on repetitive tasks and allows them to focus on strategy and client needs,” he said.
Where AI works and where it cannot
Sinha said, “AI performs well in repetitive and pattern-based tasks such as document review during discovery or due diligence, comparing contracts and checking clauses, searching case law, summarising text and drafting standard agreements.” These functions rely on speed, consistency, and scale rather than strategic or emotional judgment.
However, he said law continues to require human involvement in areas such as legal strategy, arguing complex cases, negotiation, assessing behaviour and credibility, making ethical decisions, and handling sensitive matters, including family disputes, criminal defence and mediation. He also highlighted the irreplaceable role of human skill in cross-examination.
Limits of empathy and human understanding
On whether AI can understand emotions or show empathy, Sinha said it cannot. He explained that “while AI can recognise patterns in language, it cannot feel or relate to human experiences, understand trauma, interpret emotional cues in negotiations, or weigh moral considerations.” As a result, legal work involving sensitivity, ethics, and emotional intelligence will always require human intervention.
He said AI remains a powerful helper rather than a replacement, adding that while it can accelerate research, review, drafting, and analysis, legal judgement, strategy, ethics, and human understanding remain firmly in human hands.
End of Article
