Books & Magazines
March 26, 2024
7856
0
The judiciaries of India and the United States, while both integral components of their respective democratic systems, exhibit significant differences in their structure, jurisdiction, and function. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for comprehending the distinct legal landscapes within which these judiciaries operate.
| Parameter | Indian | American |
| Judicial System | Single & integrated system of courts: adopted from the GoI Act of 1935. Enforces both Central and State Laws. | Double System of Courts: The federal laws are enforced by the federal judiciary and the state laws are enforced by the state judiciary. |
| Original Jurisdiction | Confined to federal cases. | Covers not only federal cases but also cases relating to naval forces, maritime activities, ambassadors, etc. |
| Appellate Jurisdiction | Constitutional + Civil + Criminal cases. | Constitutional cases only. |
| Advisory Jurisdiction | It has advisory jurisdiction. | It has no advisory jurisdiction. |
| Discretion | Grant special leave to appeal in any matter against the judgment of any court or tribunal (except military). | No such plenary power. |
| Judicial Review | Scope is limited. | The scope is very wide. |
| Jurisdiction and Powers | Can be enlarged by Parliament. | Limited to that conferred by the Constitution. |
| Defends Rights of the Citizen | According to the ‘procedure established by law’. | According to the ‘due process of law’. |
The Indian judiciary is deeply rooted in common law principles with a strong emphasis on judicial activism and expansive interpretations of fundamental rights, whereas the American judiciary operates within the framework of a constitutional democracy with a tradition of judicial restraint and adherence to stare decisis.
Download Our App
Download Our App
<div class="new-fform">
</div>
