Pratibha Sahu, Christ (Deemed To Be) University
ABSTRACT
Judicial Review is a powerful tool for preventing the passage of arbitrary, unfair, and unconstitutional laws. It’s one of the measure’s of securing accountability in the contemporary state. The cornerstone of judicial review in India is the supremacy of the law. The court has the authority to assess what the legislative, executive, and judicial branches have done. Any statute or regulation that conflicts with the fundamental law of the land can be declared unconstitutional by the court and rendered unenforceable. For the first time ever the scope of judicial review was pioneered and established was in England and in the world was in 1610 with the Lord Coke ruling in the case of Dr. Bonham v. Cambridge University1. When it comes to India the doctrine of judicial review got constructed and transcribed for the very first time in the case of Emperor v. Burah2. Therefore, judicial review has its roots deeply planted in the states of both United Kingdom and in India. Thus, a comparative analysis is carried out between U.K. and India to derive out the similarities and differences in the scope of application and limitation of the principle of judicial review. The researcher in this paper also discussed about the numerous theories developed by the Supreme Court based on judicial review, including the Doctrine of Severability, the Doctrine of Eclipse, the Doctrine of Prospective Overruling, and others. Along with those topics, the importance of judicial scrutiny of constitutional amendments, legislative action, and administrative action has been highlighted in the paper.
Keywords: Judicial Review, India, U.K., Constitution, Courts.
