Revision summary
Both systems are common-law, precedent-based, and now fronted by a public Supreme Court. The UK’s 2009 Supreme Court and Human Rights Act moved it toward India’s rights-review look. India can strike down statutes and even test amendments against basic structure; the UK cannot. Appointments diverge: JAC in Britain, collegium in India after NJAC fell in 2015. PIL and a written Constitution keep Indian judicial practice more managerial of the executive.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
India inherited the common-law court, the adversarial trial, and a professional Bar from Britain. In recent decades the two systems have moved closer on a Supreme Court as a public institution and on rights review, and further apart on who appoints judges and whether Parliament is supreme. Convergence and divergence are both real.
Body
Convergence
- The UK Constitutional Reform Act, 2005, and the UK Supreme Court (2009) separated the highest appeal from the House of Lords, which looks more like India’s distinct Supreme Court under Articles 124–147.
- An independent Judicial Appointments Commission in the UK and India’s declared commitment to judicial independence are the same family of concern, even if the machinery differs.
- Human Rights Act, 1998, in the UK and India’s long Article 21 expansion both made rights a daily judicial practice, not only a political gift.
- Both systems use common-law reasoning, precedent, and a strong culture of judicial review of executive action.
- Open judgments, live streaming experiments, and a public-facing apex court are a shared twenty-first-century style.
Divergence
- Parliamentary sovereignty remains the UK’s first principle: courts may issue a declaration of incompatibility under the HRA; they do not strike down a primary Act as India does under Articles 13 and 32.
- India has a written Constitution, basic structure (Kesavananda Bharati, 1973), and PIL; the UK has no equivalent constituent document or social-action docket of the Bandhua Mukti / MC Mehta type.
- Appointments: UK JAC and Lord Chancellor process versus India’s collegium after the Three Judges Cases and the striking down of NJAC in Supreme Court Advocates-on-Record Association (2015).
- India combines a Union Supreme Court with High Courts as constitutional courts; the UK’s devolution jurisdictions (Scotland, Northern Ireland) are a different map.
- Contempt, court-pack size, and the political heat of the collegium have no full UK twin.
Key point
- They converge as professional common-law apex courts that check the executive. They diverge because India is a constitutional state with judicial supremacy over amendments’ basic structure, while the UK remains a parliamentary state with a new but still bounded Supreme Court.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD CL[Common law Bar review] --> CV[Convergence] UK[UK SC 2009 HRA] --> CV IN[Art 13 PIL basic structure] --> DV[Divergence] AP[Collegium versus JAC] --> DV
Conclusion
Recent times pulled India and the UK together in having a visible Supreme Court and a rights-based review of government. They pulled apart on appointments, PIL, and the power to invalidate primary legislation. The shared common-law skin now covers two different constitutional bodies.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
The strength sustenance of local institutions in India has shifted from their formative phase of 'Functions, Functionaries and Funs' to the contemporary stage of 'Functionality'. Highlight the critical challenges faced by local institutions in terms of their functionality in recent times.
Next question on this syllabus topic (2020 · Q13). View answer →
-
Is the UK Supreme Court a copy of the Indian Supreme Court?
No. It is a final appellate court in a parliamentary system. India’s Court is also a constitutional court with striking-down power.
-
Did India copy the UK JAC?
India tried a commission through NJAC. The Court held it hurt judicial independence. The UK JAC still sits inside parliamentary sovereignty.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
More from this topic
Q15 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS II · 15 marks · Solution
To what extent do pressure groups, social movements and corporate lobbies deepen pluralistic democracy in India by representing excluded interests? Analyse whether the growing convergence of corporate wealth and political power poses a threat to the autonomy of formal democratic institutions.
Governance and Policy
• Civil society groups and grassroots movements go beyond periodic elections to channel marginalized voices into policy spaces. • Social movements on tribal rights and environmental protection have successfully forced the state to create protective legislation. • Representation is uneven due to a severe resource asymmetry between well-funded corporate lobbies and unorganized labor. • Some interest groups act as elite fronts, subverting public welfare for narrow sectarian gains. • Corporate financial dominance through opaque funding creates severe risks of policy capture and quid pro quo corruption. • Strengthening transparency in political funding and reinforcing regulatory autonomy are essential to safeguard democratic governance.
Q12 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS II · 15 marks · Solution
What is meant by judicial legislation? In this context, discuss the verdicts of the apex court allowing "passive euthanasia" and a "living will".
Governance and Policy
• Judicial legislation occurs when courts create binding rules to fill policy voids caused by legislative inaction. • The Supreme Court legalized passive euthanasia under Article 21, recognizing the right to die with dignity. • The *Common Cause* (2018) judgment permitted the withdrawal of life support for terminally ill patients with strict medical safeguards. • A living will is an advanced medical directive allowing individuals to pre-state their treatment preferences before incapacitation. • The Supreme Court simplified living will procedures in 2023, replacing complex magistrate approvals with basic notary attestation. • While court guidelines provide immediate relief, they underscore the need for a comprehensive parliamentary statute on end-of-life care. • Codifying these judicial norms through formal legislation ensures democratic legitimacy, ethical debate, and administrative clarity.
Q6 · UPSC Mains 2026 · GS II · 10 marks · Solution
Does India's tribal development policy reflect the aspirations for a socially grounded and equity-based governance? Justify your answer.
Governance and Policy
• India's tribal policy balances constitutional protections with socio-economic development goals. • Fifth and Sixth Schedules provide decentralized autonomy and safeguard tribal lands. • Articles 275(1) and 335 ensure grants-in-aid and reservations to bridge gaps. • PESA (1996) and FRA (2006) mark shifts toward rights-based and culturally sensitive governance. • Gram sabhas are empowered over minor forest produce and community forest rights. • Implementation is hindered by forced displacement without consent and bureaucratic inertia. • True equity requires empowering local institutions rather than relying solely on welfare delivery.