Straight answers, including the awkward ones

A case-preparation workspace for Indian advocates. You open a matter, upload the bundle, and Litora reads every page — scanned or typed, in English, Hindi, Punjabi or Urdu. On that reading it builds the case assessment, the contradiction map, bench insights from the presiding judge’s own judgments, the preparation kit — list of dates and synopsis, evidence timeline, procedural lapse scan, ingredients matrix, deposition tracker, medical evidence, issues map, exhibit register, grounds, distinguishing note, para-wise reply, cross-examination plans, missing papers, paper book and English translation — voice rehearsal and argued hearings, answers to your questions on the file, PDF and Word exports and drafts on your letterhead.

No, and it is not designed to. It prepares material for a qualified professional to review, test and settle. Nothing it produces is advice, and no output should be filed, served or relied upon without that review. If your name goes on the filing, the judgement behind it stays yours.

Yes, and it is the part we have worked hardest on. Scanned pages are transcribed in batches, several at a time, so a long bundle reads in minutes and you can watch the page count climb. Hindi, Punjabi and Urdu are read in their own script. Illegible handwriting is marked as illegible rather than guessed at, and if a batch fails the transcript shows the gap so you know exactly which pages are missing.

PDFs, scanned documents, photographs of pages and common office formats. Bundles do not need retyping before upload.

Because it changes how the file is read. In a trial court the fight is about the evidence. In the High Court or Supreme Court the facts are not retried — the fight is about error in the order below. If the matter is an appeal and the order under challenge is not on the file, confidence is held at low. The court also decides whether bench insights are available: they are for High Court and Supreme Court matters, where judgments are published.

One of the preparation tools: your advocate argues the matter at its strongest, the other side tries to defeat it, and a bench questions both and gives reasons. It is a rehearsal with no connection to any court, and a favourable result is not an indication that you will succeed.

It reasons from the record you supply, so it works across forums — criminal, civil, family, commercial and appellate. Where the file uses BNS, BNSS or BSA, the corresponding IPC, CrPC or Evidence Act provision is searched too. Verifying the current law remains your responsibility.

No. You add money to a wallet — from ₹499 — and it is charged only for AI work, by the tokens each step uses. The rates are on the pricing page.

Reading scanned pages, analysing documents, the case assessment, contradictions, bench insights, the AI tools of the preparation kit, rehearsal and argued hearings, questions on the file and the AI drafting tools. Opening matters, uploading documents, reading results, PDF and Word export and email, the paper book builder, the readiness meter and team seats are free. Original files are stored free up to 500 MB; more storage is ₹99 per 10 GB a month.

It depends on how much there is to read and how many times you run the analysis. Larger runs show an estimate first. The wallet shows the running total for each matter as it goes, call by call.

No — but creating a workspace, opening matters and uploading are free, and you can start with as little as ₹499.

The work pauses — nothing is lost and nothing is marked failed. Add money and it carries on from where it stopped.

The balance never expires and sits on the account until you use it. The only monthly charge is an optional storage pack, if you add one for more than the free 500 MB.

Unused balance, yes — on request within 14 days of the top-up. Money already spent on AI work, no, because that work was done. The full position is on the refund policy.

Yes. The wallet belongs to the organisation, not to an individual, so everyone in it draws on the same balance. Only an organisation admin can add money.

Where tax applies it is added to the top-up when you pay; the full amount you choose goes into the wallet. The invoice shows the breakdown.

It is stored encrypted on our servers and sent to our AI provider to be read, so the analysis can be produced. It goes nowhere else: we do not sell it, publish it, or share it with any other party. What the provider does with what it receives is governed by its own terms, which the privacy policy links to — those are their commitments, not ours to give. You can delete a matter, and its documents, at any time.

Not as a matter of routine. Access happens only where you ask us to investigate a specific problem, where it is strictly necessary to keep the platform running, or where we are compelled by law. Every such access is written to the audit log.

That is a question for you and your own advisers, and it depends on your jurisdiction. We have set out exactly how material is handled on the security page precisely so that you can assess it on accurate facts rather than on our reassurance.

At any time. It is removed from live systems immediately and purged from backups within 30 days, subject only to retention we are required by law to observe.

We are established in India, and some providers are established elsewhere, so material may be processed abroad. Contractual protections apply to each transfer. The specifics are in the privacy policy and in the data processing agreement.

Yes, ask at privacy@litoraai.com. We will answer it straight, including where the honest answer is that we do not do something yet.

Yes. Language models make errors, including confident and well-worded ones. Every authority must be read before it is relied on. The workspace marks what it could not verify, but it cannot mark an error it does not know it has made. That is exactly why the reasoning and the sources are exposed rather than hidden.

Courts in several jurisdictions have sanctioned practitioners for filing material containing fabricated citations produced by AI tools. That is the precise risk the verification requirement exists to prevent. Check the authorities before you file.

No. It is an estimate of prospects on the papers you supplied, and it knows nothing that is not in those papers — not the bench, not the listing, not the other side’s counsel. That is why it never appears alone: it carries a confidence level, the reasoning behind it, and what would move it. When confidence is low the figure is deliberately pulled toward the middle and the screen says so. It should not be repeated to a client as a number in its own right.

In code, not by asking the model — a model asked to rate its own confidence answers “moderate” almost every time. It is derived from what share of the file was actually readable, how much text there is to reason over, whether the documents this kind of matter turns on are present at all, and how many critical questions you have left unanswered.

In the argument, yes: before the advocates speak, real Supreme Court and High Court judgments on the question are fetched, only those may be cited, each one is a link that opens the full judgment, and any other case name is removed before you see it. In the assessment each authority is checked: found ones are marked verified with their link, the rest are marked unverified. A real judgment can still be misread or no longer good law — open it and read it before it goes near a filing.

For High Court and Supreme Court matters, the judge’s own published judgments on questions like yours: the facts, what was decided and why, and what has persuaded that bench. It is a reading of published reasoning. You can also ask a question in English (for example, whether the judge grants bail in such cases) over the last 1–5 years: it shows the % of the judge’s published judgments where the answer was yes, with each judgment linked. That % is a count from published judgments, not a forecast, and Litora never rates a judge.

Good, but not perfect — and the difference matters on a document where a single digit is the case. Check any FIR number, section, date or amount you intend to rely on against the original page. Where the page is genuinely unreadable it is marked illegible rather than guessed at, and it will never invent a number it could not read.

Then it reports that it cannot, and says what would settle it. An analysis that tells you the record is too thin to decide the point has done its job. That is not a ground for a refund — see the refund policy, clause 7.

Only through the documents you supply. The underlying models have a training cut-off and no reliable awareness of amendments, repeals or decisions after it. Verify the position against the current statute and current authority every time.

That depends on your bar council or law society, and we do not purport to advise you on their rules. Check them. The obligation is yours and it is unaffected by anything in our terms.

Email contact@litoraai.com. We reply within one working day.

Yes. Add members from Team & Tasks as Admin, Advocate, Junior / Associate or Clerk (view only), and choose whether everyone sees every matter or each member only the matters they work on. Tasks can be given with a due date, and every upload, run, export and deletion is logged with user and timestamp for the firm’s own audit purposes.

On every account, and it can be made mandatory across a firm. On an account holding client material we would treat it as expected rather than optional.

From the workspace, or by writing to us. Reduce any storage pack to nothing first; then no further charge follows. Ask about unused wallet balance before you close it rather than after.

Rank First Technologies Private Limited, a private limited company incorporated in India under the Companies Act, 2013, CIN U58201PB2026PTC068900, at F-542, Phase 8A, Sector 75, Mohali, Punjab 140308, India. It is a software company, not a law firm.