The judicial systems in India and UK seem to be converging as well as diverging in recent times. Highlight the key points of convergence and divergence between the two nations in terms of their judicial practices.
Approach · directive: “highlight”
What it asks · Compare the two systems: where they are moving closer (independence, appointments, rights review, procedure) and where they remain apart (constitutional supremacy, structure, trial practice).
It asks 2 things — answer each
- Highlight the key points of convergence in judicial practice between India and the UK
- Highlight the key points of divergence
Open with · India and the UK share the common-law tradition, but India's courts work under a written Constitution while the UK's work under parliamentary sovereignty.
Cover
- Convergence: the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 created a UK Supreme Court (opened October 2009), separating the top court from the House of Lords.
- Appointments insulated from the executive: the independent Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales; India's Collegium, reaffirmed when the NJAC was struck down (2015).
- Rights review: under the Human Rights Act 1998 UK courts read laws compatibly with Convention rights; the Supreme Court held the 2019 prorogation unlawful.
- Shared practice and strains: precedent, tribunals, virtual hearings in COVID-19; pendency in India and Crown Court backlogs in the UK.
- Divergence in supremacy: Indian courts strike down laws and protect the basic structure; UK courts can only issue a declaration of incompatibility.
- Structure, trial and role: India's integrated hierarchy, no juries, PIL and wide writs; the UK's separate jurisdictions, Crown Court juries and a divided profession.
Close with · The two converge on independence and rights review but diverge on supremacy: no UK court can strike down legislation, while Indian courts guard the basic structure.
Add value (verified)
- The UK Supreme Court was created by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 and opened in October 2009, replacing the Appellate Committee of the House of Lords as the highest appeal court.The Court and Legal System - The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ↗“The Supreme Court was established by the Constitutional Reform Act 2005, and opened its doors in October 2009”
- Under the Human Rights Act, UK courts can only declare a law incompatible with the European Convention; no UK court can strike it down.The Court and Legal System - The Supreme Court of the United Kingdom ↗“No UK court, including the Supreme Court, has the power to "strike down" legislation if it is incompatible with the European Convention on Human Rights.”
- The Judicial Appointments Commission is an independent body that selects judicial candidates for England and Wales.Judicial Appointments Commission - GOV.UK ↗“The JAC is an independent commission that selects candidates for judicial office in courts and tribunals in England and Wales”
Question: UPSC's CS (Main) 2020, GS Paper II — paper ↗. Approach: Minimalist IAS, checked 3 Oct 2026 (how we verify) — UPSC publishes no model answers. ·
Model answer· 222words · Minimalist IAS
India and the UK share the common-law tradition, but India's courts work under a written Constitution while the UK's work under parliamentary sovereignty. Recent reforms narrowed some gaps, not the deepest.
Key points of convergence
- Separation from the legislature: the Constitutional Reform Act 2005 created a UK Supreme Court, opened in October 2009, in place of the House of Lords' Appellate Committee.
- Appointments insulated from the executive: the independent Judicial Appointments Commission for England and Wales; India's Collegium, reaffirmed when the NJAC was struck down (2015).
- Rights review: under the Human Rights Act 1998 UK courts read laws compatibly with Convention rights, and held the 2019 prorogation of Parliament unlawful.
- Shared practice and strains: precedent, tribunals, virtual hearings in COVID-19; pendency in India, Crown Court backlogs in the UK.
Key points of divergence
| Aspect | India | UK |
|---|---|---|
| Supremacy | Courts strike down laws | Declaration of incompatibility only |
| Structure | One integrated hierarchy | Separate legal jurisdictions |
| Trials | No juries | Juries in Crown Court |
- Judicial role: PIL and writ powers (Articles 32 and 226) make Indian courts active in policy; UK courts defer more to Parliament.
- Legal profession: a unified Bar in India; barristers and solicitors in the UK.
Convergence lies in independence and rights review, divergence in supremacy: no UK court can strike down legislation, while Indian courts guard the basic structure of a written Constitution.
Prepared by Minimalist IAS to the answer standard of Shivam Singh (mentor, 7 years) · facts checked against official sources (how we verify) · updated 3 Oct 2026. UPSC publishes no model answers: compare your structure and coverage with this, then write your own.
