Copyright © 2026 Authors retain the copyright of this article. This article is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

@article{182625,
        author = {Dr. Debabrata Roy},
        title = {A Comparative Study of Judicial Review: Trends in India UK and USA},
        journal = {International Journal of Innovative Research in Technology},
        year = {2025},
        volume = {12},
        number = {2},
        pages = {3037-3048},
        issn = {2349-6002},
        url = {https://ijirt.org/article?manuscript=182625},
        abstract = {The judiciary controls the discretionary powers granted to the government by Parliament through judicial review. As a result, Parliament will continue to be the top lawmaker, supporting the notion of Parliamentary supremacy, which is safeguarded as a fundamental fact. Today, the government and other public entities make thousands of decisions every day that have an enormous impact on people. The activities of ministers and other public bodies are, nonetheless, subject to review and other forms of scrutiny. The supremacy of law is the core concept of review. The court has the ability to examine the legislative, executive, and judicial actions. Any legislation and order that is in disagreement with the country's fundamental law might be declared unconstitutional and unenforceable by the court. The position of legal review in the USA and UK. Judicial review first appeared in the USA with the famous Marbury v. Madison landmark case. However, the original Lord Coke ruling in Dr. Bonham v. Cambridge University had established the first time the scope of review in 1610 in England. Although the authority of review is not directly stated in the U.S. Constitution, it is established by Articles III and VI. Since the UK does not have a written constitution, the paper will also discuss the "Parliamentary Sovereignty" notion, which was central to the Constitutional democracy. Parliament In the UK, supremacy takes into account the needs of the people, therefore the courts are unable to review Parliament's acts. Except in a few instances involving human rights and individual freedom, the Parliament forbids the reconsideration of main law. However, secondary laws are up for reconsideration. In the UK, a court may examine executive and administrative acts. The course taken by Great Britain was different. Instead, a body of literature, customs, and traditions assert that a valid act of Parliament cannot be called into doubt in court. The final word belongs to the legislature, not the judiciary.},
        keywords = {Judiciary, judicial power, judicial review, written Constitution, USA.},
        month = {July},
        }