On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Arun Ram <arunram25(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hi, The judgment can be accessed here.[1] Please refer to para 33. There have been over 50 instances in the past where the courts of India (including the Supreme Court and High Courts) have cited Wikipedia in their judgments.[2] The Supreme Court of India has commented on Wikipedia as a source of information[3]: "Wikipedia, like all other external aids to construction, like dictionaries etc, is not an authentic source, although the same may be looked at for the purpose of gathering information. Where an express statutory definition of a word exists, a Wiki definition cannot be preferred. It cannot normally be used for the purpose of interpreting a taxing statute or classification of a product vis-a-vis an entry in statute. However, as a source of authority, Wikipedia is frequently cited by judges around the world. This is not restricted to India alone. The New York Times reports that beginning in 2004, more than 100 opinion in the States have cited Wikipedia, including 13 from federal appeals courts. Is this a good thing? There's a split of authority." As for the use of Wikipedia links and summaries in courts, this practice is not exclusive to India. US judges have been citing Wikipedia in their orders and judgements all over including up to the level of the Federal Circuit Courts.[4] Mention in liveMINT: Wikipedia Justice[5] Status on WORLD DOMINATION? Almost there. :) Anirudh Bhati 00 91 9328712208 Skype: anirudhsbh [1] http://indiankanoon.org/doc/1521881/ [2] http://www.indiankanoon.org/search/?formInput=wikipedia%20doctypes:%20judgm… [3] Supreme Court judgement in M/s Ponds India Ltd. vs Commissioner of Trade Tax (2008) http://www.indiankanoon.org/doc/1358324/ [4] http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/29/technology/29wikipedia.html [5] http://www.livemint.com/2010/10/22225322/Quick-Edit--Wikipedia-justice.html…