India’s welfare delivery increasingly relies on digital and automated systems for identification, eligibility verification, record linkage, and benefit disbursal. While these tools promise efficiency, they can also cause wrongful exclusions at scale due to data mismatches, opaque backend processing, and automated classifications treated as final. This paper conceptualizes those affected as victims of algorithmic harm in the welfare state and argues that constitutional enforcement under Articles 14 and 21 can supply an effective remedy framework even in the absence of a dedicated AI statute. Article 14’s anti-arbitrariness and equality principles support enforceable duties of intelligible reasons, reviewability, and non-discriminatory impact in automated welfare administration. Article 21’s dignity-linked procedural fairness requires notice, meaningful opportunity to contest, and time-bound access to correction and redress because welfare exclusion can threaten subsistence and health. The paper proposes a constitutional minimum for high-impact welfare automation: notice of automated action, intelligible reasons, access to relevant personal data used, practical correction pathways, meaningful human review with override power, and interim relief pending review. It then outlines judicial and policy remedies: speaking-order requirements, disclosure directions, auditability and record-keeping standards, independent impact assessments, procurement controls to prevent black-box outsourcing, and specialized grievance mechanisms. Data connectivity and proprietary obstacles can impede transparency and successful redress, as demonstrated by a case study of Telangana’s Samagra Vedika “entity resolution” system. In order to increase delivery through automation without turning poverty into a compliance failure or welfare rights become unquestionable database outputs, the article ends with a Victim Remedy Framework specifically designed for welfare situations.