Which source supports this Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank summary?

The recorded source is indiankanoon.org. It is classified as secondary or other linked source; review the linked material and subsequent docket history before relying on this summary.

HomeCasesPooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank

Allegation status: this record tracks a public allegation or unresolved matter. It must not be described as an adjudicated finding.

Evidence review: source unavailable. The linked source could not be retrieved during the latest evidence pass. This page preserves the structured corpus baseline and states the gap explicitly.

Evidence-linked corpus record: this page is generated from the structured public record and has a publication-readiness score of 85/100. It is publicly indexable with its documented evidence gaps stated on-page; the linked source and evidence boundary remain controlling.

Corpus matter record

Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank

Supreme Court · May 5, 2026

India Editorial impact: low fake citations trial None Adjudicated

Direct answer

What happened in this matter?

Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified. Outcome: Ongoing. The NCLT Mumbai Bench cited several Supreme Court judgments in its order admitting Essel Infraprojects to CIRP. The suspended director's counsel alleged that, except for two, the cited judgments and extracted portions could not be verified and were 'hallucinated' (non-existent). The Supreme Court treated this as an integrity issue and directed an affidavit listing the disputed citations.

Why the court cared: The matter is tracked because the public record raises an unresolved AI-related allegation. The page does not treat Ongoing as an adjudicated finding unless the linked source does so.
Why it matters now: This matter connects fake citations and trial involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Ongoing in Supreme Court, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Why this matter is tracked

Operational lesson

This matter connects fake citations and trial involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Ongoing in Supreme Court, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.

Record details

CourtSupreme Court

Jurisdictioninternational

CircuitNot recorded

DateMay 5, 2026

AI toolAI (implied, unspecified)

Party typeJudge

OutcomeOngoing

Known amountNot recorded

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

Ongoing

Correction behavior

Correction behavior is not separately verified in the current record.

Tracked discrepancy record

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

Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified.
Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified.
Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified.
Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified.
Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified.
Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified.

Questions this record answers

What happened in Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank?: Fabricated: Case Law | NCLT cited this Supreme Court judgment; petitioner alleges the citation/name and extracted portions are not genuine and could not be verified. Outcome: Ongoing. The NCLT Mumbai Bench cited several Supreme Court judgments in its order admitting Essel Infraprojects to CIRP. The suspended director's counsel alleged that, except for two, the cited judgments and extracted portions could not be verified and were 'hallucinated' (non-existent). The Supreme Court treated this as an integrity issue and directed an affidavit listing the disputed citations.
Why does Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank matter for legal AI risk?: This matter connects fake citations and trial involving AI (implied, unspecified) with Ongoing in Supreme Court, making it a concrete reference point for verification, supervision, and response controls.
What does the public record establish about Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank?: The record concerns a public allegation and does not establish an adjudicated finding. The recorded link is a secondary or other public source and should be checked against the docket where available. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.
Which source supports this Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu & Kashmir Bank summary?: The recorded source is indiankanoon.org. It is classified as secondary or other linked source; 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.

Pooja Ramesh Singh v. Jammu and Kashmir Bank Ltd. & Anr.Supreme Court · Jul 2, 2026same court · fake citations + trial Chen v. Goodmore Investments & TawaSupreme Court · May 1, 2026same court · fake citations + trial Ben Cohen v. Ramat GanSupreme Court · Mar 22, 2026same court · fake citations + trial Ben-Cohen v. Municipality of Ramat GanSupreme Court · Mar 22, 2026same court · fake citations + trial Gummadi Usha Rani & Anr. v. Sure Mallikarjuna Rao & Anr.Supreme Court · Feb 27, 2026same court · fake citations + trial Jones v. Family Court at WhangareiSupreme Court · Feb 11, 2026same court · fake citations + trial

Linked evidence record

indiankanoon.org

Secondary or other linked source
The recorded link is not classified as an official court source or docket mirror.

Open recorded source Suggest a correction to this record

Public-record statusallegation or unresolved matter

Indexing eligibilitypublicly indexable with evidence status disclosed

Evidence-review statussource unavailable

Published and maintained byManu Ayala · AI VortexIndependent legal AI risk intelligence

Evidence review recorded Jul 27, 2026

Source host classified Attribution boundary stated Limitations disclosed

Corpus checked Aug 12, 2026; latest tracked decision Aug 11, 2026. AI Vortex summarizes public records and does not replace the court document or legal research service.

Use this record

Open case brief Open Supreme Court profile Explore jurisdiction

Evidence boundary

The record concerns a public allegation and does not establish an adjudicated finding. The recorded link is a secondary or other public source and should be checked against the docket where available. This page is not a substitute for the complete docket, subsequent history, or jurisdiction-specific advice.

Read methodology