Skip to main content
NOPE

NOPE · AI and people

AI incidents

Reports of AI-related harm and adverse experiences affecting people’s safety, wellbeing, rights and livelihoods. Explore what happened and the evidence available.

NOPE’s core concern is when AI communicates with a person, acts on their behalf, or depicts or impersonates them. The tracker also records consequential decisions, claims and privacy harms involving AI. Each case needs a described connection between AI use and the harm, including private information recorded into or disclosed to an AI service. Each account is reviewed for publication; claims may remain uncorroborated or disputed. How we review and count cases

Explore incidents Our scope and evidence

In this selection

Published cases
3
Countries with reported events
1
Located 3 of 3 cases · 0 unknown
Languages in checked sources
4
Recorded for 3 of 3 cases
2Core concern
AI communicated, acted for, depicted or impersonated 1Contextual cases
AI made a decision or claim about someone

These figures describe the cases collected by NOPE. Coverage varies with discovery, reporting and available evidence. They do not estimate how often AI-related harm occurs.

0cases with a recorded lawsuit outcome 1cases with a recorded regulatory response 0cases involving minors

Response counts currently use each case’s principal recorded outcome. Further proceedings may be described in its account.

When events happened

1 case without a known event year

Cases in this selection, counted once in their first known event year. A series may continue beyond that year. Reporting and collection dates are excluded. NOPE has searched recent events more thoroughly than earlier years, so bar heights also reflect collection effort.

1 20251 2026
Reported severity CriticalMedium
More filters: AI relation, use, setting, sources and responses
Clear filters

3 of 1099 published cases

Export JSONExport CSV
8 Oct 2025 to 2 Sept 2026IndiaUnidentified AI tool

India's Supreme Court overturns customs penalty citing apparent AI hallucinations

On 8 October 2025 the Additional Commissioner of Customs in Surat imposed a penalty of ₹425,27,99,100 (about ₹425 crore) on a diamond trader under Section 114 of the Customs Act, 1962, for allegedly misdeclaring a consignment of natural diamonds as lab-grown diamonds to pay a lower tariff. The trader's challenge was dismissed by the Gujarat High Court on 20 January 2026. Before the Supreme Court the trader argued that judgments and articles cited in the penalty order had been generated using artificial intelligence. On 2 September 2026 a bench of Justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu, after checking the material, found that the order relied on case law that was non-existent or carried fake citations, and on real cases that did not lay down the propositions attributed to them, which the court said 'appears to be a hallucination of AI'. Holding that the use of AI and reliance on this dubious material was fatal to the order, the court set aside both the penalty order and the High Court's order without deciding the merits, sent the matter for fresh adjudication by a different officer of the same rank, and left any action against the order's author to the appointing authority. The AI tool used is not named in the read reports.

Contextual tracker case Medium reported severity Internal Action

AI involvement supported · Causal attribution supported · 4 sources, 1 underlying account · Added 29/09/2026

Event date unknownIndiaUnidentified video tool

Surat, India: a deepfake video of Rajya Sabha MP Govind Dholakia was used to run an 'old coin' buying fraud; two men arrested and nine cybercrime complaints linked to their accounts

Surat Cyber Crime Police said a publicly available video of Rajya Sabha MP and diamond industrialist Govind Dholakia was manipulated with AI, its audio replaced by a voice-over in which he appeared to say that people holding old coins or currency notes could contact a number and receive lakhs or crores of rupees. The video circulated on Facebook and Instagram alongside fake 'Old Coin Company' profiles using his photos; people who responded were asked to pay Rs 1,000 to 1,500 by UPI as processing or registration fees and were told of a fabricated Reserve Bank of India warning to win their trust. After members of the public contacted Dholakia, his organisation SRK complained to police. Investigators traced the operation to Nuh in Haryana and arrested two men, aged 25 and 30, from Thathaula village; ten bank accounts were linked to them, and nine complaints on the National Cybercrime Reporting Portal from across India, totalling about Rs 9.84 crore, were connected to those accounts.

Core concern Medium reported severity Criminal Charges

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution supported · 1 source · Added 18/09/2026

6 Mar 2026IndiaChatGPT (reported)

Police say two Surat students found dead had searched ChatGPT about suicide

Two college students were found dead in a washroom on a temple campus in Surat, Gujarat, on 6 March 2026, and police said their preliminary investigation pointed to suicide. Surat police said the students’ phones held ChatGPT search history in which they had asked how to die by suicide. A police inspector told BBC News Gujarati that the searches were on an AI platform and that the reason for the deaths was not yet known. No inspected source describes what ChatGPT replied. Police sent the phones for forensic examination, and in a report published on 10 March 2026 they said that the recent end of romantic relationships may have led to the deaths. No forensic result had been reported in the sources found.

Core concern Critical reported severity Investigation Opened

AI involvement reported · Causal attribution unclear · 8 sources, 4 underlying accounts · Added 23/03/2026

Cases may have several effects and sources. Mixed accounts qualify when they include a reported harm or adverse experience. People are counted within individual cases where sources support a number; we do not publish a collection-wide total of distinct people.

A source’s existence, the experience it reports and AI’s causal role are separate questions. A lawsuit records allegations unless a subsequent finding establishes them.

Methodology and corrections · Subscribe via RSS · Suggest a case or correction · Find support

Last dataset update: 04/11/2026. Dataset available under CC BY 4.0.