HE ROLE OF CRIMINAL LAW IN REGULATING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE MISUSE: A LEGAL STUDY
Abstract
Artificial Intelligence (AI) represents the most transformative technological advancement of the twenty-first
century, redefining governance, economics, communication, and human relationships. Yet, alongside its
promise of innovation and efficiency, AI has introduced unprecedented challenges for law and justice
systems worldwide. From algorithmic bias and surveillance abuses to autonomous weapons, misinformation,
and data theft, the misuse of AI has begun to erode the fundamental foundations of accountability and
human rights. The rapid pace of technological evolution has outstripped the capacity of traditional legal
frameworks, compelling jurists, lawmakers, and ethicists to confront one of the most complex legal dilemmas
of our time: how should criminal law respond to the misuse of artificial intelligence? This research
investigates the intricate relationship between AI and criminal liability, focusing particularly on India’s
evolving legal landscape while drawing comparative insights from global jurisdictions. It explores the extent
to which existing criminal statutes are adequate to address emerging AI-related offenses and proposes
frameworks for reform aligned with international human rights and cyber law standards.
The study situates AI misuse within the broader domain of cybercriminality and digital governance. It
categorises misuse into three interrelated dimensions: first, AI as a tool of crime (for instance, AI-driven
phishing, voice cloning, or cyber fraud); second, AI as a target of crime (the manipulation or theft of machine
learning models and data sets); and third, AI as a potential perpetrator or autonomous agent generating
harm without human intervention. These categories reveal the doctrinal vacuum in existing criminal law,
which is designed around human intent, consciousness, and control. Traditional legal principles of mens rea
(guilty mind) and actus reus (guilty act) are ill-equipped to address algorithmic or autonomous conduct. The
central hypothesis of this paper is that criminal law, both in India and globally, must evolve from
anthropocentric paradigms to techno-jurisprudential models capable of attributing responsibility in
distributed and autonomous systems.
century, redefining governance, economics, communication, and human relationships. Yet, alongside its
promise of innovation and efficiency, AI has introduced unprecedented challenges for law and justice
systems worldwide. From algorithmic bias and surveillance abuses to autonomous weapons, misinformation,
and data theft, the misuse of AI has begun to erode the fundamental foundations of accountability and
human rights. The rapid pace of technological evolution has outstripped the capacity of traditional legal
frameworks, compelling jurists, lawmakers, and ethicists to confront one of the most complex legal dilemmas
of our time: how should criminal law respond to the misuse of artificial intelligence? This research
investigates the intricate relationship between AI and criminal liability, focusing particularly on India’s
evolving legal landscape while drawing comparative insights from global jurisdictions. It explores the extent
to which existing criminal statutes are adequate to address emerging AI-related offenses and proposes
frameworks for reform aligned with international human rights and cyber law standards.
The study situates AI misuse within the broader domain of cybercriminality and digital governance. It
categorises misuse into three interrelated dimensions: first, AI as a tool of crime (for instance, AI-driven
phishing, voice cloning, or cyber fraud); second, AI as a target of crime (the manipulation or theft of machine
learning models and data sets); and third, AI as a potential perpetrator or autonomous agent generating
harm without human intervention. These categories reveal the doctrinal vacuum in existing criminal law,
which is designed around human intent, consciousness, and control. Traditional legal principles of mens rea
(guilty mind) and actus reus (guilty act) are ill-equipped to address algorithmic or autonomous conduct. The
central hypothesis of this paper is that criminal law, both in India and globally, must evolve from
anthropocentric paradigms to techno-jurisprudential models capable of attributing responsibility in
distributed and autonomous systems.