Certo Is this judgment real?
Beta, Supreme Court only. We check Supreme Court of India judgments only for now: a High Court citation reads "Not in our corpus", which never means it does not exist.

Supreme Court of India

STATE OF KARNATAKA versus COMMON CAUSE AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

Decided
18 March 2016
Judges listed
RANJAN GOGOI, PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE (as the open data lists them; this may not name the whole bench)
Disposal
Disposed off

Citations

Official
[2016] 2 S.C.R. 902 · 2016 INSC 271
Also cited as
  • (2016) 13 SCC 639 (3 citing judgments)

Learned from how other judgments cite this one, in their text or in the official Supreme Court Reports' lists of cases they refer to: each is cited this way by at least two judgments, and at least twice as often as any other citation to this judgment in that report. We hold no commercial reporter's text, only these citation strings.

Not shown
1 other citation string that other judgments attach to this one, on evidence too thin or too divided to publish.

Cited by

We found no other Supreme Court judgment we hold that cites this one.

Counted only in the Supreme Court judgments we hold whose text we could read, not in High Court judgments. We match each citation to a judgment automatically, so a citation we cannot match is not counted. "Cited" says only that a judgment refers to this one, not whether it followed, distinguished or overruled it.

The Court's text

Paragraphs from our copy of the Supreme Court Reports print, with the Court's own paragraph numbers, the printed page and, where printed, the margin letter. Link to paragraph N with #para-N.

1

We have heard the learned counsels for all the contesting parties. Upon due consideration, we review our judgment dated 13'" May,2015 passed in Writ Petition (Civil) No.13 of2003, Writ Petition (Civil) No.197 of2004 and Writ Petition (Civil) No.302of2012 to the extent indicated below: (i) The exception carved out in paragraph 23 of the aforesaid judgment dated 13•" May, 2Q 15 pennitting the publication of the photographs of the President, Prime Minister and Chief Justice of the country, subject to the said authorities themselves deciding the question, is now extended to the Governors and the Chief Ministers of the States. (ii) In lieu of the photograph of the Prime Minister, the photograph of the Departmental (Cabinet) Minister/Minister In-charge of the concerned Ministry may be published, if so desired. (iii) In the States, similarly, the photograph of the Departmental (Cabinet) Minister/Minister In-charge in lieu of the photograph of the Chief Minister may be published, if so desired. (iv) All othe~ observations/directions in the aforesaid judgment ·dated 13'' May, 20 I 5 shall continue to remain in force subject to.the above modification.

pp. 903–904, margin F

2

The review petitions are disposed of in the above terms. Jain Petitions disposed

p. 904, margin B