Artificial lawyer by AI.

"India has 54 million pending cases, 47 million in district courts, 6.3 million in high courts and nearly 90,000 in the Supreme Court, with just 25,000 judges to handle them." The Union and state governments and public sector companies have filed the largest number of cases. " According to the Legal Information and Briefing System (LLMBS), "The finance Ministry alone is party to nearly 200,000 cases," wrote Aditya Sinha. The reasons are economical. Government officials keep on filing frivolous appeals against adverse judgement because they do not have to pay, the taxpayer loses out. Only one appeal should be allowed for free, after which officials should have to pay all costs from their own money. The second big reason is that lawyers charge fees in millions per appearance. shiksha.com. So, it is in their interest to ask for continuance repeatedly, allowing the wealthy to delay a verdict for decades. Some cases are pending for over 30 years  (SCO Observer) and in many instances a litigant has died before the dispute is resolved. Which makes the entire judicial system totally meaningless. Lawyers write the laws, argue on both sides and pronounce judgement as judges. Their charges are usurious, beyond the poor and the middle class (India Legal), and affordable only to the wealthy and criminals. Lawyers must be forced to charge a flat fee for a case, regardless of the number of days required, and more than two continuances must be forbidden. Sadly, no lawyer will agree to write such a law. Entrepreneur Rohit Shroff has announced "his decision to abandon his 'Building in India' dream." "Citing a grueling tax environment and a sense of systemic 'suspicion' towards compliant taxpayers, Shroff revealed he has paid nearly Rs 40 million in taxes (GST and income tax) and plans to relocate his business abroad." msn.com. Creating opaque rules allows officials to make unjustified demands, forcing people to pay bribes. "Proving eligibility via documents is a unique burden that the Indian State places on its citizens." "The State took it upon itself to categorise the population as 'eligible' and 'ineligible'; after all corruption enables the 'ineligible' beneficiary to access the State. But to achieve its goal the bureaucracy appropriated the power to verify its own documents, casting suspicion both on its documents and, rather conveniently, on those in possession of these documents," wrote Yamini Aiyar. "Indians have long had a confrontational relationship with the nation's tax office, whose adversarial approach has crushed countless small businesses and international investors." "The problem isn't just that a tax demand might be arbitrary. Even if you eventually win, it takes a long time for the dispute to be settled," wrote Mihir Sharma. In some instances, a contributing reason to commit suicide (Moneylife). Perhaps, AI could be trained to analyse cases for a small fee, empowering citizens to argue their own cases in court or hold their lawyers responsible for poor representation. Since this will be online it will not need human input, thus bypassing politicians, officials and lawyers. Will they allow it? When extortion is so lucrative.