Supreme Court of India38,397 judgments
Every citation,
checked against the judgment itself.
Pramaanam reads your draft, finds each Supreme Court citation, and tests it against the reported text: that the judgment exists, that the parties and year are right, and that every quotation appears word for word.
Free. No account. Your draft is checked and discarded, never stored.
Written submissions on behalf of the appellant
1. The appellant relies on Deepak Ananda Patil v. State of Maharashtra, 2023 INSC 11, para 14, where this Court observed: “The second limb of the submission of Dr Singhvi is that there are concurrent findings…”
2. The same judgment is said to hold that “the submission of Dr Singhvi is not that there are concurrent findings…”
3. Reliance is placed on Kumar Industries v. Union of India, 2023 INSC 11, for the proposition that concurrent findings bind this Court.
§ 1
Check a draft
Upload a written submission, a petition or an opinion, or paste a passage. Each citation comes back with one status, the reason in a sentence, and the judgment's own words beside yours.
- 60 citations per draft
- 2 MB largest file
- 0 files kept
§ 2
Four tests, in the order a careful junior would apply them.
-
i
Find
Every citation in the draft, with the case name and any quotation printed beside it. Footnotes in Word files are read too.
-
ii
Prove
The number must lead to exactly one judgment. SCC and AIR numbers count only when at least two other judgments print the same pairing.
-
iii
Compare
Both parties must fit, the year must agree, and each quotation is matched word for word, down to a single dropped “not”.
-
iv
Report
One status per citation, the reason in a sentence, and an annexure you can place on the file.
A machine may raise a flag. It may never give a green tick on a guess.
§ 3
Plain words, and never “fake” when the answer is simply unknown.
- Verified
- The number proves the judgment, the name and year match, and any quotation is word for word. It does not say the judgment supports your argument.
- Needs review
- Not proven, or close but not exact: a near-match quotation, one party that differs, a match on names alone. A person should look.
- Misquote · Name mismatch · Wrong paragraph
- Said only when the case is proven by its number and the quotation or name is clearly tied to that citation.
- Scan noise in source
- The quotation matches except for what looks like a scanning error in the judgment's text. Compare with the printed page.
- Not in corpus
- No matching judgment in the dataset. Not a finding that it is fake: it may be a High Court case or a report we cannot map.
- Cannot verify
- The check could not run, for example because the stored judgment has no text.
§ 4
Measured on a held-out test set, and published as measured.
- 667 citations printed in real judgments, held out from all tuning and run once, on 5 November 2026.
- Quotations taken from real judgments, and synthetic alterations of them; not lawyers' drafts. Of 1,166 altered quotations, 2 still passed as verified; both were read by hand and one has since been fixed. Older scanned judgments carry text errors (about 2% of characters on a 40-page sample transcribed by the project, not human-verified), which is why near matches go to review, not to an accusation.
§ 5
Your draft stays yours.
Not stored. The file is read into a temporary place, checked and deleted. No account, no history, no tracking, no third-party scripts or fonts.
No AI on your text by default. The checks are exact comparisons against the judgments. An optional AI second opinion exists, is off on this site, and could only ever lower a result.
What it does not check. Whether the judgment supports your argument; High Court and tribunal cases; short forms such as “supra” and “ibid”; headers, footers and text boxes in Word files.
Not legal advice. An automated check of citations, in preview. Verify against an authorised source. A lawyer decides.
§ 6
Questions a careful advocate asks first.
Does “Verified” mean the judgment supports my argument?
No. Verified means the citation leads to the judgment, the parties and year match, and any quotation appears word for word. Whether the judgment holds what it is cited for is a question of law, and it stays with you.
A citation says “Not in corpus”. Is the case fake?
Not necessarily. The corpus holds Supreme Court of India judgments from the open CC-BY-4.0 dataset. A High Court or tribunal decision, or a report series that cannot be mapped to a judgment, will also show as not in corpus. Pramaanam never calls a citation fake.
Is my draft stored, or used to train anything?
No. The file is read into a temporary place, checked and deleted. There is no account and no history, and nothing is sent to a third party. The optional AI second opinion is switched off on this site.
Which citation formats are read?
Neutral citations (2023 INSC 11), SCR, SCC, AIR and SCC OnLine, with the case name beside them, in Word, PDF or plain text, footnotes included. Short forms such as “supra”, “ibid” and “id.” are not checked, and nor are headers, footers or text boxes in Word files.
Why does a near-identical quotation go to review and not to “Misquote”?
The text of older judgments comes from scanned pages and carries errors. When the difference could be the scan and not the draft, Pramaanam asks a person to compare with the printed page instead of making an accusation.
Can the report go on the file?
Yes. “Download annexure” gives a dated page listing each citation, its status and the reason. It is an automated check and not legal advice; verify against an authorised source.
Before you file, check.
One upload. Every Supreme Court citation in the draft, tested against the judgment.