A Comparative Analysis of The Doctrine of Judicial Review in India, US And UK

The present work undertakes a comprehensive investigation and comparative assessment of the doctrine of judicial review in the nation of India, the US, and the United Kingdom. Judicial review is a legal principle that empowers the judiciary to scrutinise and invalidate actions undertaken by both the legislative and executive wings of government which are inconsistent with the constitution and violate fundamental rights. The study begins by examining the historical evolution of the doctrine of judicial review in each country, highlighting the differences and similarities in the legal framework and constitutional provisions that underpin the doctrine. The study thereafter evaluates the implementation of the doctrine of judicial review in every country, with a specific emphasis on the judiciary's role, the extent of review, and the criteria for review. This study will provide a thorough examination of judicial review within India, including the necessary procedures, in order to offer a clear and concise understanding of the concept. This analysis will include the historical background, aim, and extent of judicial review within the Indian legal system. The study also examines the influence of the doctrine of judicial review in each country on the division of powers, democratic governance, and the safeguarding of basic rights. The text examines the difficulties and constraints associated with the notion of judicial review in different countries and proposes suggestions for enhancing its effectiveness. In addition, the study will analyse the present condition of judicial review within each of the three nations, and will investigate the challenges and issues now confronting the idea in each country. The paper concludes by doing a comparative examination of the idea of judicial review within India, the United States of America, and the UK, emphasising both the similarities and differences. The study emphasises that while the three countries are committed to upholding the rule of law and protecting fundamental rights, the implementation and interpretation of the concept of judicial review differ in each jurisdiction. The chapter also mention some suggestions like courts must analyse the constitutionality of cooperative federalism in conflicts involving federal legislation, such as power distribution and interstate trade. This will enhance the cohesion of federal democracies. Judicial review is designed to interpret and enforce current laws. Furthermore, the autonomous nature of the judiciary is a crucial factor whenever the court possesses the power to examine any statute. A judiciary that lacks dependence is unable to deliver a just and impartial verdict.