So, i have my synopsis and this is it
Synopsis: Regulating Artificial Intelligence in India: Legal Challenges and Ethical Considerations
1. Introduction
Background:

Global Impact of AI: Artificial Intelligence (AI) has become a transformative force in the 21st century, impacting various sectors such as healthcare, finance, education, governance, and defense. Its capabilities range from simple automation to complex decision-making, which were previously considered the domain of human intelligence.
AI in India: India, with its rapidly growing digital economy, stands at the cusp of an AI revolution. Government initiatives like Digital India and Make in India are fostering innovation and the adoption of AI technologies across multiple domains. However, with these advancements come significant regulatory challenges.
Regulatory and Ethical Challenges: Unlike traditional technologies, AI operates in a unique paradigm where decisions made by algorithms can have profound legal, ethical, and societal implications. Issues such as data privacy, algorithmic transparency, accountability, and bias are becoming increasingly critical, especially in the absence of a robust regulatory framework in India.
Statement of Problem:

Regulatory Gaps: India currently lacks a dedicated legal framework specifically tailored to regulate AI technologies. Existing laws, like the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 (pending enactment), offer limited guidance on the unique challenges posed by AI. This regulatory void creates risks, including the potential for harm due to biased or opaque AI systems, and raises concerns about the protection of fundamental rights.
Ethical Dilemmas: Ethical considerations in AI, such as fairness, transparency, and accountability, are not sufficiently addressed within India's current legal landscape. For instance, the use of AI in sensitive areas like criminal justice, healthcare, and financial services could lead to outcomes that are ethically questionable, highlighting the need for clear ethical guidelines and oversight mechanisms.
Need for Research: This dissertation aims to address these gaps by analyzing the current legal and ethical challenges in AI regulation in India and proposing a framework that can guide policymakers in developing comprehensive laws and regulations.
2. Review of Literature
General Development in the Field:

Global Context: The regulation of AI has been a subject of significant scholarly debate globally. The European Union's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the proposed Artificial Intelligence Act (AI Act) set a precedent for stringent AI regulation focused on protecting individual rights and ensuring the ethical use of AI technologies.
Indian Context: In India, literature on AI regulation is still in its nascent stages. Key reports, such as the National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence by NITI Aayog (2018), primarily focus on leveraging AI for economic growth, with limited attention to legal and ethical challenges. Scholarly discussions are beginning to emerge, analyzing the applicability of existing laws to AI and advocating for the development of AI-specific legislation.
Noteworthy Contributions:

Scholarly Works: Several scholars have contributed to the discourse on AI regulation, highlighting issues such as the opacity of AI algorithms, the potential for discrimination, and the need for accountability mechanisms. These works emphasize the importance of developing legal frameworks that can address these challenges while fostering innovation.
Legal Analyses: Legal scholars have examined the adequacy of existing laws, such as the Information Technology Act, 2000, in regulating AI. Discussions often revolve around the limitations of these laws in addressing AI's unique characteristics, such as its autonomous decision-making capabilities and the difficulty in attributing liability.
Relevance to Proposed Study:

Positioning in Literature: This dissertation builds on existing literature by focusing specifically on the Indian context, where there is a pressing need for AI regulation. It seeks to contribute to the ongoing discourse by analyzing how India can adapt its legal framework to address the ethical and legal challenges posed by AI.
Research Gap: Despite the growing interest in AI regulation, there is a lack of comprehensive studies that focus on the interplay between legal frameworks and ethical considerations in the Indian context. This study aims to fill this gap by proposing a balanced approach that safeguards individual rights while promoting AI innovation.
3. Methodology
Objectives:

Objective 1: To critically analyze the existing legal frameworks in India, including the Information Technology Act, 2000, and the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, in the context of AI regulation.
Objective 2: To identify and evaluate the ethical challenges associated with AI deployment in India, with a focus on issues such as algorithmic bias, transparency, accountability, and the impact on fundamental rights.
Objective 3: To conduct a comparative analysis of AI regulatory frameworks in leading jurisdictions, such as the European Union (GDPR and AI Act) and the United States, and to draw lessons for India.
Objective 4: To propose a comprehensive legal and ethical framework for AI regulation in India, taking into account the unique socio-economic and cultural context of the country.
Research Questions:

Legal Frameworks: What are the current legal provisions in India that relate to AI, and how effective are they in addressing the legal challenges posed by AI technologies?
Ethical Challenges: How do existing laws in India address the ethical concerns associated with AI, such as bias, transparency, and accountability?
Comparative Analysis: What can India learn from the AI regulatory frameworks of other jurisdictions, particularly in terms of balancing innovation with ethical and legal safeguards?
Proposed Framework: What would a comprehensive legal and ethical framework for AI regulation in India look like, and how can it be effectively implemented?
Hypothesis:

Hypothesis 1: The current legal framework in India is insufficient to address the unique challenges posed by AI technologies, particularly in areas such as accountability, transparency, and ethical AI deployment.
Hypothesis 2: A comparative analysis of AI regulations in other jurisdictions can provide valuable insights that can be adapted to the Indian context, leading to the development of a robust and effective regulatory framework.
Hypothesis 3: The integration of ethical considerations into the legal framework for AI in India is crucial for ensuring that AI technologies are used in a manner that is fair, transparent, and accountable.
Research Methodology:

Research Design: The research will adopt a doctrinal approach, analyzing legal texts, statutes, and case law relevant to AI regulation in India. This will be complemented by a comparative analysis of AI regulations in the European Union and the United States.
Data Collection: Primary sources will include legal texts such as the Information Technology Act, 2000, the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, and relevant case law. Secondary sources will include scholarly articles, government reports, policy papers, and international legal instruments.
Comparative Analysis: The study will compare AI regulatory frameworks in the European Union (GDPR and AI Act) and the United States (AI-related policies and guidelines), with a focus on identifying best practices that can be adapted to the Indian context.
Analysis: The research will involve a critical analysis of the identified legal and ethical challenges, followed by the formulation of recommendations for a comprehensive regulatory framework that addresses these challenges while promoting AI innovation.
4. Chapterization
Chapter 1: Introduction

Overview of AI technology and its implications for various sectors in India.
Introduction to the legal and ethical challenges associated with AI regulation.
Statement of the problem, research objectives, and methodology.
Chapter 2: Legal Framework Governing AI in India

Detailed analysis of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and its applicability to AI technologies.
Examination of the Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019, and its relevance to AI, particularly in terms of data privacy and protection.
Discussion on the limitations of existing legal frameworks in addressing AI's unique challenges, such as algorithmic accountability and transparency.
Chapter 3: Ethical Challenges in AI Deployment

In-depth exploration of ethical concerns related to AI, including bias, transparency, accountability, and the impact on fundamental rights.
Case studies illustrating ethical dilemmas in AI use within various sectors in India, such as healthcare, law enforcement, and finance.
Discussion on the need for ethical guidelines and oversight mechanisms to ensure responsible AI deployment.
Chapter 4: Comparative Analysis of AI Regulations in Leading Jurisdictions

Comparative study of AI regulatory frameworks in the European Union (GDPR and AI Act) and the United States.
Analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of these frameworks and their applicability to the Indian context.
Lessons learned from international best practices and their potential adaptation to India's legal and ethical landscape.
Chapter 5: Proposed Legal and Ethical Framework for AI in India

Recommendations for enhancing India's legal framework to better regulate AI technologies, with a focus on creating a balanced approach that promotes innovation while safeguarding individual rights.
Proposal for ethical guidelines that address issues such as algorithmic bias, transparency, and accountability.
Discussion on the implementation challenges and strategies for ensuring compliance with the proposed framework.
Chapter 6: Conclusion and Recommendations

Summary of key findings from the research.
Final recommendations for policymakers, legal practitioners, and stakeholders involved in AI development and regulation.
Suggestions for future research directions in AI regulation and ethics.
5. Bibliography
Legal Texts:
Information Technology Act, 2000.
Personal Data Protection Bill, 2019 (pending enactment).
European Union General Data Protection Regulation
(GDPR).
Proposed Artificial Intelligence Act (EU).

Scholarly Articles:

Articles on AI ethics, legal challenges, and regulatory frameworks, focusing on both Indian and international contexts.
Key works on the ethical considerations of AI deployment, particularly in areas such as bias, transparency, and accountability.
Government Reports:

National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence, NITI Aayog, 2018.
Reports by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) on AI governance.
International reports on AI regulation from organizations such as the OECD and World Economic Forum.

These are the guidelines

 DISSERTATION PREPARATIONGUIDELINES
 a) Dissertation to be hardbound.
 b) Twocopies to be submitted to the Institute.
 c) Dissertation to be submitted as per the following sequence:
 i) Cover page as per Annexure-I
 ii) Declaration (from Student) regarding Originality of Work as per Annexure-II
 iii) Certificate (by guide /Supervisor) as per Annexure-III
 iv) Acknowledgement
 v) Table of contents
 vi) Table of cases (with pagination)
 vii) List of abbreviations
 viii)
 List of tables/figures
 ix) Chapters
 x) Bibliography
 xi) The citation style shall be followed as per ILI footnoting style.
 d) The Dissertation shall consist of 80-100 pages divided into a minimum of 5 (five)
 chapters inclusive of an Introduction and Conclusion. The chapters must be at
 least 15 pages barring the last chapter.
 e) Synopsis shall include:
 Please refer Annexure ‘1’
 f) Chapter 1- Introduction shall consist of the heads given in the Synopsis
 (Annexure ‘1’)
 g) Plagiarism check is essential with reference to (Promotion and Academic Integrity&
 Prevention of Plagiarism in Higher Educational Institutions) Regulations, 2018. The
 student shall submit Plagiarism Check Certificate and the permitted limit for
 similarity index is upto a maximum of 20%.
 h) SUPERVISIONOFDISSERTATION
 i.
 There shall be a mandatory meeting of the students with their respective
 supervisors. The attendance record shall be maintained by the respective
 mentors as per the dates mentioned by the DRC.
ii.
 These visits are integral and intended to enhance the quality of your
 dissertation submission. The submission of the work during these visits shall be
 duly documented.
 i)
 FORMATTINGRULES
 i.
 placed two
 Each chapter should have a title, which should be in the center and
 inches from the top, in uppercase.
 ii.All pages must be numbered, with the preliminary pages marked in roman
 numbers, and the main chapters, annexures, and references/bibliography must
 be numbered, beginning from page number 1. All numbers should be placed
 in the bottom, center aligned.
 iii.
 Margin from the left should be 1.5 inches, with top, bottom and right
 hand margin at 1 inch.
 iv.
 Font Size:- Level 1 heading: Times New Roman, Font Size 14, Numbered, Centred & Bold- Level 2 heading: Times New Roman, Font Size 12, Left aligned & Bold- Level 3 heading: Times New Roman, Font Size 12, Left aligned & Italicized- Font size to be used for the text shall be in Times New Roman, Font Size 12 with
 the line spacing of 1.5 inch and Justified alignment- Font size for footnote shall be in Times New Roman, Font Size 10 with the line
 spacing of 1 inch.
 j) CITATION STYLE
 ILI RULES OFFOOTNOTING
 The Institute has formulated a set pattern of footnoting, which is followed in The Journal
 of Indian Law Institute, Annual Survey of Indian Law and various other publications of the
 Institute. Contributors of articles, notes and comments and essays are required to follow
 this pattern.
 Part I
 MODEOFCITATIONFORBOOKS
 A. FOR ANAUTHOREDBOOK
 (i) By a single author:
 Name of the author, Title of the book p.no. (if referring to specific page or
 pages) (Publisher, Place of publication, edition/year of publication).
 E.g. M.P.Jain, Indian Constitutional Law 98 (Kamal Law House, Calcutta, 5th
 edn., 1998).
 (ii) By two authors:
 Name of the authors, Title of the book p.no. (if referring to specific page or
 pages) (Publisher, Place of publication, edition/year of publication).
 E.g. M.P. Jain and S.N. Jain, Principles of Administrative Law 38 (Wadhwa,
 Nagpur, 2001)
(iii) By multiple authors (more than two):
 Name of the first two authors, et.al., Title of the book p.no. (if referring to
 specific page or pages) (Publisher, Place of publication, edition/year of
 publication).
 E.g. Jerry L. Mashaw, Richard A. Merrill, et.al., The American Public Law System
Cases and Materials 50 (West Group, St. Paul, MN, 1992).
 B. FOREDITEDBOOKS
 (i) By a single editor:
 Nameofthe editor (ed.), Title of the book p.no. (if referring to specific page or pages)
 (Publisher, Place of publication, edn/year).
 E.g. Nilendra Kumar (ed.), Nana Palkhivala: A Tribute (Universal Publishers, Delhi,
 2004).
 (ii) By two editors:
 Name of the editors (eds.), Title of the book p.no. (if referring to specific page
 or pages) (Publisher, Place of publication, edn/year).
 E.g. S.K. Verma and Raman Mittal (eds.), Intellectual Property Rights: A
 Global Vision 38-42 (ILI, Delhi, 2004).
 (iii)By more than two editors:
 Name of the editors, the first two only, et.al. (eds.), Title of the book p.no. (if
 referring to specific page or pages) (Publisher, Place of publication, edn/year).
 E.g. Chatrapati Singh, P.K. Coudhary, et.al. (eds.), Towards Energy Conservation
 Law 78(ILI, Delhi, 1989).
 (iv)By, or an auspices of, an organization/institution:
 Indian Law Institute, Index to Indian Legal Periodicals (ILI, Delhi, 2002)
 Part II
 MODEOFCITATIONFORARTICLES/ESSAYS
 (i) Citation of a paper published in a journal/periodical:
 Name of author of the article, title of the essay within inverted commas,
 volume number of journal, Name of the journal in abbreviation & page
 number (year).
 E.g. K. Madhusudhana Rao, “Authority to Recommend President’s Rule
 under Article 356 of the Constitution” 46 JILI 125 (2004).
 (ii) Citation of a paper published in a case reporter:
 P.K. Thakur, “Permissibility of Probation in Offences Punishable with
 Minimum Imprisonment” 2 SCJ 26-38 (2002).
 (iii) Citation of an essay published in a book edited:
Name of author of the essay, title of the essay within inverted commas, in
 Name of the editor(s), title of the edited book page number (publisher,
 edition/year).
 eg. R.K. Nayak, “Evolving Global Drugs Law for the 21 st Century” in D.C.
 Jayasuriya, R.K. Nayak et.al.(eds.), Global Drugs Law 70 (1997).
 (iv) Citation of an essay published as a part of a Survey of Law (e.g. Annual
 Survey of Indian Law– [an annual publication of the Indian Law Institute,
 NewDelhi]:
 Name of author of the essay, title of the essay within inverted commas, volume
 number name of the survey, page number (year).
 E.g.: P.S. Jaswal, “Constitutional Law-I” XXXVIII ASIL 115-150(2002).
 (v) Citation of a write-up published in a newspaper/periodical:
 Name of the writer, Title of the write-up within inverted commas, Name of
 the newspaper, date.
 Robert I. Freidman, “India’s
 Shame: Sexual Slavery
 and Political
 Corruption are Leading to an AIDS Catastrophe” The Nation, Apr. 8,
 1996.
 (vi) Citation of an editorial from a newspaper:
 Editorial, Title of the Editorial within inverted commas Name of the
 newspaper, date.
 Editorial, “Short-circuited” The Times of India, Aug. 2, 2004.
 (vii)Citing a reference form Encyclopedia:
 Edwin R.A. Seligman (ed.), XV Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences
 (The Macmillan Co., NY, 1957).
 Part III
 WEBSITES
 If the websites give information as to when it was last modified, the must be
 cited, if not one must cite the date of visiting the website.
 (i)
 Information Technology Act 2000, India, available at:
 http://www.mit.gov.in/it-bill.asp (Last Modified July 29, 2003).
 Part IV
 UNPUBLISHEDWORKS
 i. Unpublished Research Work (E. g., Dissertation/Thesis):
 Nameofthe Researcher, Title of the dissertation/thesis (Year) (Unpublished
 Ph.D. thesis, Name of the University/organization).
 Raman Mittal, xyz (2004) (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
 Punjab University).
ii. Interviews:
 Interview with M. Veerappa Moily, Law Minister, The Hindu, July 25, 2004.
 iii. Forthcoming publication of a book:
 G. Gann Xu, Information for Corporate IP Management (In Press, 2004).
 iv. Forthcoming publication of an article:
 Shabistan Aquil,, “Classification of Human Rights””, in S.K. Verma, Shabistan
 Aquill, et. al. (eds.), Human Rights: Cases and Material (In Press, 2004).
 Part V
 MODEOFCITATIONOFCASELAW
 (a)
 (b)
 (c)
 (d)
 (e)
 All India Reporter (AIR)
 (i)
 (ii)
 If the case name and citation together are to be written in the text of
 the article itself [Note: This format is not allowed in JILI):
 Kesavananda Bharati v. State of Kerala (AIR 1962 SC 933).
 If the name and citation are to be written in the footnote itself:
 Kesavnanda Bharati v. State of Kerala, AIR 1962 SC 933.
 (iii) Where the case title is written in the body of the text, only the name of
 the case shall be in the text e.g. Kesavananda Bharathi v. State of
 Kerala and the citation is written in the footnote as AIR 1973 SC 1461.
 Supreme Court Cases (SCC)
 (i)
 (ii)
 If the case name and citation together are to be written in the text of
 the article itself [Note: This format is not allowed in JILI]
 Jassa Singh v. State of Haryana [(2002) 2 SCC 481]
 If the name and citation are to be written in the footnote itself:
 Jassa Singh v. State of Haryana (2002) 2 SCC 481.
 (iii) If the case title is to be written in the body of the research paper, only the
 name of the case shall be written e.g., Jassa Singh v. State of Haryana
 then the citation would be written in the footnote as (2002) 2 SCC 481.
 Criminal Law Journal (Cr.L.J)
 Lakhwinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab, 2003 Cri LJ 3058 (SC).
 Ujjagar Singh v. State of Haryana, 2003 Cri LJ 1691 (P&H).
 All England Reports (All ER)
 Wilcox v. Jeffery [1951] 1 All ER 464.
 If parties to a case are numerous, for e.g.
 State of Punjab v. Union of India
 This case is to be cited as:
 State of Punjab v. Union of India (1977) 3 SCC 592.
Part VI
 ACTS
 The Information Technology Act, 2000 (Act 21 of 2000)
 Part VII
 REPORTS
 (i) Law Commission of India, 144 th Report on Conflicting Judicial Decisions
 Pertaining to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (April, 1992).
 (ii) Government of India, Report: Committee on Reforms of Criminal Justice
 System (Ministry of Home Affairs, 2003).
Annexure- I
 Title of Dissertation
 ADISSERTATION SUBMITTED TOGURUGOBINDSINGH
 INDRAPRASTHAUNIVERSITY, DELHI IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OFTHE
 REQUIREMENTFORTHE DEGREEOFBACHELOROFLAWS
 by
 STUDENT’S NAME.(in Capital letters)
 ENROLMENTNO…..
 UNDERTHESUPERVISIONOF
 Prof./Dr./Mr./Ms........……………………..
 (Supervisor’s Name in Capital Letters)
 Professor/Associate Professor/Assistant Professor
 DEPARTMENTOFLAW
 MAHARAJAAGRASENINSTITUTEOFMANAGEMENTSTUDIES
 NEWDELHI,Maharaja Agrasen Chowk, Sector 22, Rohini
 Delhi-110086
Annexure- II
 DECLARATION
 I, ............…………………….., student of BALLB Xth Semester, hereby declare that the
 dissertation titled “........……………………………………………………………..” which is
 submitted by me to the Department of Law, Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management
 Studies, Delhi in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree of B.A.
 LL.B by the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi is my original work. It is
 further
 declared that all the sources of information used in the dissertation have been
 duly acknowledged. That the dissertation is electronically checked for plagiarism by
 plagiarism detection software to assess the originality of the submitted work.
 Place…………
 Date..............…
 ……………….
 (Signature of the Student)
Annexure III
 CERTIFICATE
 On the basis of the declaration submitted by..........……………………….., student
 of BALLB Xth Semester, I hereby certify that the dissertation titled
 “...........…………………………………..………………………………………..”
 submitted to the Department of Law, Maharaja Agrasen Institute of Management
 Studies, Delhi in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the award of the degree
 of BALLB by the Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Delhi has been
 carried out by him/her under my guidance and supervision.
 .......................……..
 Prof./Dr./Mr./Ms..……………………….
 Prof./Dr./Mr./Ms..…………………………….....
 (Supervisor)
 Place:…………..
 Date:……………
 ................……..
 (Principal, Dept.of Law