ISSN: 3107-4154 (O)
Volume II, Issue 2 (2026)
Algorithmic Liability and Legislative Gap-Filling:
A Critical Framework for Regulating Generative AI in India
Authors – Arathi Anil, Assistant Professor, St. Mary’s College, Manarcad, Mahatma Gandhi University, Kerala.
Month, Year of Publication – July, 2026
Abstract
The rapid proliferation of generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) systems, deployed in legal-advice platforms, automated contract drafting, predictive-justice tools, and online content moderation, has exposed a critical deficit in Indian statutory and common-law liability regimes. While India’s existing legal-policy architecture engages with data-protection under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and sectoral rules on intermediary liability under the Information Technology Act, 2000, it does not systematically address the epistemic opacity, emergent harms, and novel accountability challenges posed by GenAI-mediated decision-making. This article argues that the absence of a dedicated GenAI-liability framework risks entrenching algorithmic disenfranchisement, particularly for vulnerable populations, and undermines the constitutional and human-rights-based imperatives of transparency, non-discrimination, and effective remedies.
Drawing on comparative legislative experiments in the European Union (Artificial Intelligence Act), the United States (Algorithmic Accountability Act proposals), and Singapore’s sector-specific regulatory sandbox model, this paper develops a doctrinal-policy framework for India grounded in the principles of proportionality, risk-tiering, and ex ante oversight. It critiques the current reliance on post-hoc tortious-liability and contractual-remedies paradigms, which prove ill-suited for distributed, opaque, and rapidly evolving AI-value chains. The article proposes a three-tier legislative architecture: (a) a statutory “GenAI-Risk Classification Matrix” aligned with existing constitutional and statutory rights, (b) a technology-specific “AI-Provider Liability Regime” distinguishing between developers, deployers, and end-users, and (c) a specialised “AI-Oversight Tribunal” modelled on existing quasi-judicial bodies such as the National Green Tribunal and the Competition Appellate Tribunal.
Empirically, the paper analyses recent Indian and international case law on AI-enabled defamation, algorithmic bias in employment and credit, and automated legal-tech platforms, demonstrating how current doctrinal tools fail to attribute fault or ensure redress where responsibility is diffused across data-producers, model-builders, and platform-operators. It further examines how international soft-law instruments, such as the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of Artificial Intelligence and the OECD Principles on AI, can be domesticated into India’s legislative-policy discourse without diluting its constitutional identity. The article concludes by drafting model statutory provisions and regulatory guidelines that Centre- and State-level legislatures may adopt to operationalise a rights-based, anticipatory, and adaptive governance regime for GenAI in India’s legal-policy ecosystem.
keywords
generative AI, algorithmic liability, climate-induced displacement, tribal rights, legislative framework
Full Paper PDF format
Cite as
Anil, A. “Algorithmic Liability and Legislative Gap-Filling: A Critical Framework for Regulating Generative AI in India” International Journal of Legal Policy, Vol.2(2) 50-66 (2026).
