Abstract

Judicial review is a process by which the judiciary examines, determines, and invalidates the executive or legislative actions that are inconsistent with the Constitution of India. The Constitution of India explicitly establishes the mechanism for judicial review through various articles, including Articles 13, 32, 131 to 136, 143, 226, and 246. This judicial review serves as a fundamental element in maintaining the system of checks and balances within the framework of the separation of powers. It grants the judiciary the authority to oversee the actions of the legislative and executive branches and to uphold the primacy of the constitution. The judiciary's role encompasses the interpretation of the constitution, clarifying the distribution of powers among the different branches of government. Articles 32 and 226 further empower the judiciary with the crucial ability to conduct judicial review, which not only holds a significant place within the Constitution but is also considered an integral component of its basic structure. The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) is a set of rules and regulations that govern the process of civil litigation in India. Under the CPC, there are various mechanisms for review, which allow parties to challenge and seek a re-evaluation of a court's decision. The review mechanism aims to ensure that justice is served and that errors or omissions in the original decision are rectified. Judicial review under the Indian Constitution and the review mechanism under the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) serve different purposes and operate in distinct contexts. While judicial review is a constitutional principle that allows the judiciary to examine and invalidate laws and actions that are inconsistent with the Constitution, the review mechanism under the CPC focuses on rectifying errors or omissions in the original decision of a court.

Keywords