AI and Digital Evidence in Family Proceedings: Transforming the Adjudication and Access to Justice

Family conflicts are often described as the battleground of human emotions, capacities, histories, and even human complexity, within which legal reasoning alone struggles to capture the full spectrum of lived realities. Building on this aspect, the integration of AI, i.e., Artificial Intelligence, which has made a mark in family law, has played a pivotal role, particularly in a sensitive domain for child custody. In the Indian jurisdiction, it is seen that the custody determination, which is deeply influenced by socio-cultural dynamics, is exercised with judicial discretion and often encounters challenges related to subjectivity and the potentiality of secondary evidence. By leveraging a large dataset, which includes case histories, bank balances, behavioural aspects, and economic background, AI can assist the court in determining parental fitness by forecasting the child's welfare as well as the spouse's best interest. The study will undertake a comparative analysis of all the jurisdictions. The paper will argue on the issue that while AI holds substantial promises, it is arguable for promoting fairness. In conclusion, AI and all the digital footprint from social media play a significant aid for the family proceedings, particularly in assessing the financial capacity and other maintenance obligations. Family maintenance records claims shall not overshadow the algorithmic inference, which may be selective or misleading. The court here can retain a cautious as well as balanced approach for ensuring the AI-driven insights, as the social media evidence is merely based on assistance in strengthening the fact-finding, which would be without disregarding the judiciary scrutiny, secondary evidentiary standard, and also the fundamental objective for securing the fair and equitable maintenance outcome and welfare of the child.

AI, Judicial discretion, Maintenance obligation, Algorithmic, and Welfare.

1. “Electronic Evidence and Secondary Evidence: State (NCT of Delhi) v. Navjot Sandhu, (2005) 11 SCC 600, is an early Supreme Court authority dealing with electronic records and their evidentiary treatment. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Electronic Evidence – Authentication: Anvar P.V. v. P.K. Basheer, (2014) 10 SCC 473, established the importance of statutory requirements for proving electronic records produced as secondary evidence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Certificate for Electronic Evidence: Arjun Panditrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal, (2020) 7 SCC 1, is the leading authority concerning certification and admissibility of secondary electronic evidence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Technological Evidence: Tomaso Bruno v. State of Uttar Pradesh, (2015) 7 SCC 178, recognises the increasing significance of electronic and technological material in judicial fact-finding. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Family Court's Evidentiary Discretion: Deepali Santosh Lokhande v. Santosh Vasantrao Lokhande, 2017 SCC OnLine Bom 9877, is particularly relevant to matrimonial proceedings because it examines the wider evidentiary discretion available to Family Courts under Section 14 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. WhatsApp Evidence in Matrimonial Disputes: Ravishankar Yadav v. Neha Kumari (2025) examines the evidentiary significance of WhatsApp communications and the interaction between electronic evidence requirements and proceedings before the Family Court. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Pen Drive and Electronic Evidence: Prakash Bari v. Poonam Champia (2025) considers electronic material stored in a pen drive and the relationship between the requirements for secondary electronic evidence and the special evidentiary jurisdiction of the Family Court. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Digital Communications in Matrimonial Litigation: Manish Minda v. Alka Minda (2025) concerns CDs, WhatsApp chats, transcripts of conversations and other electronic material sought to be produced in matrimonial proceedings. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Call Records and WhatsApp Chats: Kailash Menaria v. Yashoda Menaria (2026) is relevant to the evidentiary treatment of call-detail records and WhatsApp communications in Family Court proceedings, particularly in relation to certification and privacy. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Digital Photographs and Electronic Records: Sri Mangena Sri Venkataramana v. Smt. Mangena Sri Anusha Devi (2026) concerns WhatsApp screenshots, e-mail printouts, digital photographs and other electronic material relied upon as secondary evidence in family proceedings. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Privacy in Matrimonial Proceedings: Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, (2017) 10 SCC 1, provides the constitutional foundation for examining privacy, dignity and informational autonomy when private digital material is introduced as evidence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Electronic Recordings in Matrimonial Disputes: Vibhor Garg v. Neha, 2025 INSC, is significant for examining electronic recordings in matrimonial proceedings alongside questions of authenticity, privacy, relevance and evidentiary value. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023: Sections 58, 61, 62 and 63 provide the contemporary statutory framework for secondary evidence and electronic/digital records. These provisions are essential for analysing AI-generated and AI-manipulated evidence under the present Indian evidentiary regime. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Family Courts Act, 1984: Section 14 is central to the research because it gives the Family Court flexibility to receive material that assists it in effectively determining a matrimonial dispute, thereby raising the question of whether such flexibility can extend to AI-generated or manipulated evidence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Digital Evidence in Matrimonial Disputes: Aqsa Sajid, Tanya Singh, Avinash Kumar Babu & Yogesh Chandra Gupta, “Digital Evidence in Matrimonial Disputes: Challenges and Opportunities,” International Journal of Economic Practices and Theories (2026), examines WhatsApp messages, covert recordings, call records, social-media evidence and digital financial trails in matrimonial litigation and identifies authentication, privacy and deepfakes as emerging concerns. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. AI-Generated Deepfake Evidence: Setty Hrudai Tej, “Regulating AI-Generated Deepfake Evidence Under the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023,” The IUP Journal of Law Review 16(3) (2026), 5–21, examines the difficulties involved in applying the existing evidentiary framework to AI-generated and AI-manipulated evidence. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Deepfakes and False Evidence: Pooja Kisan Bhosale, Mannalal R. Pandiya & Vijay Sahadeo Chavan, “Deepfakes and False Digital Evidence in Indian Courts,” International Journal of Law 12(1) (2026), 378–382, discusses AI-generated audio, video and images and their implications for authentication and admissibility. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Forensic Examination of Deepfakes: Jenifer Loovens & Hasan Tinmaz, “A Systematic Literature Review of Deepfakes in Forensic Science,” Forensic Imaging 43 (2025), 200647, examines the forensic challenges associated with identifying sophisticated AI-generated material and the absence of uniform detection methodologies. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Deepfakes and Judicial Proceedings: “Threat of Deepfakes to the Criminal Justice System: A Systematic Review,” Crime Science (2024), provides an interdisciplinary assessment of the impact of deepfakes upon evidence, investigations, judicial fact-finding and the criminal justice system.” [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Revolutionizing Library Services in Nairobi: Ethical Implications and Future Trends in User Interaction
• ESPYREAL: A Mobile Based Multi-Currency Identifier for Visually Impaired Individuals Using Convolutional Neural Network
• Comparative Analysis of AI-Driven IoT-Based Smart Agriculture Platforms with Blockchain-Enabled Marketplaces
• AI-Based Dish Recommender System for Reducing Fruit Waste through Spoilage Detection and Ripeness Assessment
• SEA-TALK: An AI-Powered Voice Translator and Southeast Asian Dialects Recognition