HomeCasesMr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd.

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 90/100. It passed the source, context, and standalone-summary checks used for public indexing; individual legal editorial review is not represented.

Corpus matter record

Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd.

HC Bombay · Jan 7, 2026

IndiaEditorial impact: mediumpro sefake citationscontracttrial

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's written submissions cited a non-existent case "Jyoti w/o Dinesh Tulsiani Vs. Elegant Associates" with no citation or copy; court and law clerks could not locate it and concluded submissions likely AI-generated, causing wasted judicial time. Outcome: Adverse costs order.

Why the court cared: Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's written submissions cited a non-existent case "Jyoti w/o Dinesh Tulsiani Vs. Elegant Associates" with no citation or copy; court and law clerks could not locate it and concluded submissions likely AI-generated, causing wasted judicial time.
Why it matters now: Even nominal pro-se cost awards signal courts now detect AI-fabricated citations routinely.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Even nominal pro-se cost awards signal courts now detect AI-fabricated citations routinely.

Record details

CourtHC Bombay

Jurisdictioninternational

CircuitNot recorded

DateJan 7, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typePro Se Litigant

OutcomeAdverse costs order

Known amount$1

Professional sanctionNo

Attribution boundary

What the record establishes about AI use

reported

AI (implied, unspecified) is recorded in the source dataset; confirm the basis in the linked document.

Procedural posture

Adverse costs order

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's written submissions cited a non-existent case "Jyoti w/o Dinesh Tulsiani Vs. Elegant Associates" with no citation or copy; court and law clerks could not locate it and concluded submissions likely AI-generated, causing wasted judicial time.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd.?: Fabricated: Case Law | Respondent's written submissions cited a non-existent case "Jyoti w/o Dinesh Tulsiani Vs. Elegant Associates" with no citation or copy; court and law clerks could not locate it and concluded submissions likely AI-generated, causing wasted judicial time. Outcome: Adverse costs order.
Why does Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd. matter for legal AI risk?: Even nominal pro-se cost awards signal courts now detect AI-fabricated citations routinely.
What does the public record establish about Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd.?: Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.
Which source supports this Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd. summary?: The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.

Related matters

Related by court, jurisdiction, tool, or classified failure pattern. Similarity does not imply the same facts or outcome.

Paige Warthen v. Barclays Bank Delaware (Warthen I, II, III)D. Maryland · Jul 13, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)BFG Corporation v. Pierce RE Holdings et al.N.D. Illinois · Jun 30, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)CIBC Mortgages Inc v Reina FloresManitoba C.A. · Jun 12, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Allison v. Shutterfly LifeTouch LLCN.D. Illinois · Jun 8, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Wong v. WestendorfBCCRT · Jun 8, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)Sharei Torah v. HendelSC New York · Jun 1, 2026pro se + fake citations · same recorded tool: AI (implied, unspecified)

Linked evidence record

Damien Charlotin case archive

Publisher document archive
The recorded document is hosted in the upstream publisher archive.

Open recorded source

Publication statusevidence baseline passed

Published by AI Vortex · Manu Ayala
Page updated Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Jul 23, 2026; latest tracked decision Jul 21, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Cases from this court

Evidence boundary

Retained unchanged after audit: the existing summary is source-specific, non-placeholder, and supported by the recorded source link. Read the underlying source before relying on it for legal advice or a filing.

Read methodology

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

Even nominal pro-se cost awards signal courts now detect AI-fabricated citations routinely.

Tracked discrepancy record

1 citation, quotation, or authority issues are recorded in the source dataset.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd.?

Why does Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd. matter for legal AI risk?

Even nominal pro-se cost awards signal courts now detect AI-fabricated citations routinely.

What does the public record establish about Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd.?

Which source supports this Mr. Deepak s/o Shivkumar Bahry v. Heart & Soul Entertainment Ltd. summary?

The recorded source is Damien Charlotin case archive. It is classified as publisher document archive; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.