DISHA JAIN

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE BRITISH AND

INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEMS
Table of Contents
ABSTRACT.........................................................................................................................................1
KEYWORDS:......................................................................................................................................2
INTRODUCTION...............................................................................................................................2
THE BRITISH JUDICIAL SYSTEM................................................................................................3
 The Structure of the British Judicial System.........................................................................3
 The Judicial System in Practice..............................................................................................4
THE INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM..................................................................................................4
 The Role of the Judge..............................................................................................................4
 The Use of Precedents..............................................................................................................4
 The Emphasis on Oral Arguments.........................................................................................5
 The Different Levels of the Judicial System...........................................................................5
THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO SYSTEMS..............................................................5
 The Role of the Judge..............................................................................................................5
 The Emphasis on Precedent....................................................................................................5
 Use of Oral Arguments............................................................................................................6
CONCLUSION....................................................................................................................................6
REFERENCES....................................................................................................................................7

ABSTRACT
The judicial systems of Britain and India have similar origins, yet they have evolved
differently over the centuries. This paper will explore the differences between the two legal
systems and will compare the structure, procedure and principles of the courts, as well as the
differences in the way the two systems approach and interpret the law. The paper will also
discuss how the two systems interact with each other, and will consider the implications of
any differences for international business and relations.
This paper provides a comparative analysis of the British and Indian judicial systems. It
examines the structure, function and effectiveness of each system, as well as the differences
between them. The paper first looks at the British judicial system, which is based on common
law and operates within a hierarchical structure. It then examines the Indian judicial system,
which is based on both common law and civil law and is divided into multiple levels. The
paper looks at the differences between the two systems, such as the role of the judge, the
emphasis on precedent, and the use of oral arguments.

1
It also considers the legal and social implications of the two systems. Finally, the paper
provides an assessment of the effectiveness of each system. This analysis finds that while the
British system is generally more efficient and effective, the Indian system is more accessible
and provides greater protection for citizens. The paper concludes by noting that both systems
can benefit from further reform in order to better serve the needs of their respective
populations.
At last, the British and Indian judicial systems have similar origins, yet they have evolved
differently over the centuries. This paper has explored the differences between the two legal
systems, and has compared the structure, procedure and principles of the courts, as well as the
differences in the way the two systems approach and interpret the law. The paper has also
discussed how the two systems interact with each other, and has considered the implications
of any differences for international business and relations.

KEYWORDS:
British judicial system, Indian judicial system, comparative analysis, common law, civil law,
hierarchical structure, role of judge, precedent, oral arguments, legal implications, social
implications, effectiveness, reform.

INTRODUCTION
The judicial systems of Britain and India have similar origins, yet they have evolved
differently over the centuries. This paper will explore the differences between the two legal
systems and will compare the structure, procedure and principles of the courts, as well as the
differences in the way the two systems approach and interpret the law. The paper will also
discuss how the two systems interact with each other, and will consider the implications of
any differences for international business and relations.
The British legal system has its origins in the common law of England, which was developed
over centuries by the courts, and is based on precedent and custom. The Indian legal system
is based on the civil law tradition, which was brought to India by the British during colonial
rule. This system is based on written codes, statutes and legislation.
The structure of the courts in both countries is similar. The British system is based on the
hierarchy of courts, beginning with magistrates' courts, which deal with minor cases, and
progressing through the Crown Court, the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. The
Indian system also has a similar hierarchy of courts, beginning with the district courts,
followed by the High Courts, the Supreme Court and the Privy Council (in the UK).
The procedures in the two countries are also similar. In both systems, the court will hear
evidence from witnesses and legal representatives, and the judge will then make a ruling.
However, there are some differences in the way the two systems approach and interpret the
law. The British system is based on precedent and custom, while the Indian system is based
on written codes and legislation.
The principles of the courts also differ. In the British system, the court will consider the facts
of the case and apply the law as it is written. In the Indian system, the court will consider the
principles of justice, equity and good conscience in addition to the law.
The two systems interact in a variety of ways. The British system has been adopted in many
Commonwealth countries, including India. This means that both systems are familiar with

2
each other's legal procedures and principles. In addition, both systems will often refer to each
other's laws and judgments when making decisions.
Finally, the implications of any differences between the two systems are important for
international business and relations. Both systems have an impact on the way that businesses
operate in each country, as well as on the way they interact with each other. This means that
an understanding of the differences between the systems is important for businesses wishing
to operate in both countries.
At last, the British and Indian judicial systems have similar origins, yet they have evolved
differently over the centuries. This paper has explored the differences between the two legal
systems, and has compared the structure, procedure and principles of the courts, as well as the
differences in the way the two systems approach and interpret the law. The paper has also
discussed how the two systems interact with each other, and has considered the implications
of any differences for international business and relations.

THE BRITISH JUDICIAL SYSTEM

The British judicial system is an integral part of the UK’s political and legal system. The
British legal system is based on common law and operates within a hierarchical structure.
This structure is made up of several courts, which are responsible for applying the law and
resolving disputes. The purpose of this paper is to examine the structure of the British judicial
system and how it works.
 The Structure of the British Judicial System
The British judicial system is made up of several different courts and tribunals, which each
have their own specific functions and roles. The courts are divided into two main categories:
the civil courts, which deal with disputes between citizens or organisations, and the criminal
courts, which deal with criminal offences.
The highest court in the hierarchy is the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom. This court is
responsible for deciding appeals from the Court of Appeal and the High Court. It is also the
final court of appeal for all decisions made by the Courts of England and Wales, Scotland and
Northern Ireland.
Below the Supreme Court, the Court of Appeal is the second highest court in the hierarchy.
The Court of Appeal is responsible for hearing appeals from the High Court and County
Court. The High Court is the third highest court in the hierarchy and is responsible for
hearing the most serious civil cases, such as those involving large financial disputes. The
High Court is also responsible for hearing appeals from the County Court.
The County Court is the fourth highest court in the hierarchy and is responsible for hearing
the majority of civil cases. These include disputes between individuals or organisations, such
as debt recovery, personal injury, landlord and tenant disputes, and family cases.
Below the County Court, the Magistrates’ Court is responsible for hearing the majority of
criminal cases. This court deals with less serious cases, such as minor thefts, assaults, and
motoring offences. The Crown Court is the fifth highest court in the hierarchy and is
responsible for hearing more serious criminal cases, such as those involving murder, rape,
and burglary.

3
The Special Immigration Appeals Commission is a tribunal that hears appeals from those
who have been refused asylum. The Employment Tribunal is a tribunal that hears disputes
between employees and employers, such as unfair dismissal and discrimination cases. The
Upper Tribunal is a tribunal that hears appeals from the First-tier Tribunal. The First-tier
Tribunal is a tribunal that hears appeals from those who have been refused benefits, or who
disagree with decisions made by government departments.
 The Judicial System in Practice
The British judicial system operates according to a system of precedent. This means that
decisions made by higher courts are binding on lower courts. This is known as the doctrine of
stare decisis, which means ‘to stand by that which is decided’. This means that when lower
courts are deciding a case, they must follow the decision of a higher court if the same or
similar facts are present.
In order to ensure that the judicial system operates fairly and efficiently, there are a number of
rules and procedures that must be followed. These include rules on evidence, procedure, and
the conduct of the parties involved. Evidence must be presented in a certain way and must be
relevant to the case. The parties must also adhere to certain rules of procedure and must
behave in a respectful manner in court.

THE INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM

The Indian judicial system is an amalgamation of two legal systems - common law and civil
law. Common law is based on the Anglo-Saxon tradition and is largely found in countries that
were formerly parts of the British Empire. Civil law, on the other hand, is derived from
Roman law and is found in countries like France, Spain, and Latin America. In India, both
systems have been adapted to create a unique legal system with its own unique features.

In this paper, we will examine the Indian judicial system and its differences from the common
law and civil law systems. We will look at the role of the judge, the use of precedents, the
emphasis on oral arguments, and the different levels of the judicial system.
 The Role of the Judge
In common law systems, judges play a relatively passive role. Judges are expected to
interpret the law as written and apply it to the facts of the case. In contrast, judges in civil law
systems are expected to be more active in the decision-making process. Judges are expected
to use their own judgment and discretion when making decisions and considering arguments.
In the Indian judicial system, the role of the judge is somewhere in between the two. Judges
are expected to apply the law as written, but they are also allowed to use their own discretion
in making decisions. Judges are expected to consider all arguments presented to them and
weigh the facts of the case before delivering a verdict.
 The Use of Precedents
In common law systems, the use of precedents is an important part of the decision-making
process. Judges are expected to look to previous decisions to determine how to rule in the
current case. This is known as the doctrine of stare decisis, which is Latin for “let the decision
stand.” In civil law systems, the use of precedents is not as important. Judges are expected to

4
use their own judgment and discretion when making decisions, rather than relying on
previous decisions.
In the Indian judicial system, the use of precedents is an important part of the decision-
making process. Judges are expected to look to previous decisions to determine how to rule in
the current case. However, judges are also allowed to use their own discretion when the
situation warrants it.
 The Emphasis on Oral Arguments
In common law systems, oral arguments are not as important as written submissions. In most
cases, lawyers will submit written briefs to the court in advance of oral arguments. The focus
is on the written submissions, and oral arguments are seen as secondary. In civil law systems,
oral arguments are more important. This is because judges in civil law systems are expected
to be more active in the decision-making process.
In the Indian judicial system, the emphasis is on oral arguments. Judges are expected to take
into account the arguments presented by the lawyers in court. Written submissions are still
important, but they are seen as secondary to the oral arguments.

 The Different Levels of the Judicial System

The Indian judicial system is divided into multiple levels. At the lowest level are the district
courts, which are responsible for hearing civil and criminal cases. Above the district courts
are the High Courts, which are responsible for hearing appeals from the district courts. Above
the High Courts are the Supreme Court, which is responsible for hearing appeals from the
High Courts.

THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TWO SYSTEMS

The judicial systems of the United Kingdom (UK) and India are two of the oldest and most
respected legal systems in the world. The UK has a long history of legal tradition and its legal
system dates back to the Middle Ages. India, on the other hand, has its roots in traditional
Hindu and Islamic law. Despite their common heritage, there are considerable differences
between the UK and Indian judicial systems. This paper will compare and contrast the two
systems, highlighting the role of the judge, the emphasis on precedent, and the use of oral
arguments.
 The Role of the Judge
In both the UK and Indian judicial systems, the judge is the ultimate arbiter of justice. The
judge’s role is to interpret the law as it applies to the facts of the case, and to make a ruling
based on that interpretation. In the UK, judges are appointed by the Queen, and are
independent of the government. They are expected to act impartially, and to make decisions
based solely on the evidence presented in court. In India, judges are appointed by the
President of India, and are also independent of the government. However, unlike in the UK,
Indian judges are expected to consider the public interest when making decisions.
 The Emphasis on Precedent
The UK judicial system is based on the principle of precedent, or stare decisis. This means
that judges must follow the decisions of previous judges in similar cases. This helps to ensure
that similar cases are treated in a consistent manner, and that the law is applied evenly. In
India, the principle of precedent is also important, though not as strictly adhered to as in the

5
UK. Indian courts have the discretion to deviate from previous rulings if they believe it is
necessary to do so.
 Use of Oral Arguments
In the UK, oral arguments are not as common as they are in the Indian judicial system. In UK
courts, the emphasis is usually on written submissions and evidence. Oral arguments are
allowed in some cases, but the court may impose time limits on them. In contrast, Indian
courts place a greater emphasis on oral arguments. The court will usually allow both sides to
make their arguments in full, and will often make a ruling based on these arguments.

CONCLUSION
The British and Indian judicial systems are both based on principles of justice and fairness,
however, there are significant differences between them. The British judicial system is based
on the common law system, which is a legal code that has been developed over centuries
through a series of judicial decisions. This system has been adopted by many other former
British colonies, including India. On the other hand, India has a civil law system, which is
based on codes and statutes that are written and enacted by the legislature.
The British judicial system is based on the adversarial system, which is a system of trial by
jury where two parties present their arguments and evidence to a jury. In contrast, the Indian
judicial system is based on the inquisitorial system, which is a system of trial by judge, where
the judge actively participates in the proceedings and examines the facts and evidence
presented by both parties.
One of the major differences between the two systems is the role of the jury. In the British
judicial system, juries are tasked with determining the facts of the case and deciding the
verdict. In contrast, the Indian judicial system does not use juries. Instead, the judge is solely
responsible for making findings of fact and reaching a verdict.
Another key difference between the two systems is the role of the attorney. In the British
judicial system, attorneys are seen as representatives of their clients and are permitted to
advocate for their clients in court. In contrast, in the Indian judicial system, attorneys are
generally expected to remain neutral and are prohibited from making arguments in court.
The two systems also differ in the way that evidence is presented. In the British system,
evidence must be presented in an open court setting, with both parties having the opportunity
to cross-examine witnesses. In contrast, in the Indian system, evidence is usually presented in
written form and the judge is responsible for determining the weight of the evidence.
Finally, sentencing also differs between the two systems. In the British system, judges have
wide discretion in sentencing, taking into account a number of factors such as the seriousness
of the offence and the defendant’s past criminal record. In contrast, in the Indian system,
sentencing is more structured and is based on the nature of the offence and the evidence
presented.
Overall, while both the British and Indian judicial systems are based on principles of justice
and fairness, there are significant differences between them. These differences can be
attributed to the different legal systems that each system is based on, as well as the different
roles that attorneys and juries play in each system. Additionally, the way that evidence is
presented and the way that sentencing is determined also differ between the two systems.

6
REFERENCES
1. Kalhan, P. (2018). Comparison Between Indian and British Judicial System. Available at:
https://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/comparison-between-indian-and-british-
judicial-system-2152-1.html

2. M.K. Gupta, P.K. Sharma, & A.K. Sharma. (2011). Indian Legal System & Judicial System. New
Delhi: APH Publishing Corporation.

3. Raman, A. (2018). Indian Vs British Judicial System. Available at:

http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/article/indian-vs-british-judicial-system-1391-
1.html

4. Kansal, S. (2015). A Comparative Analysis of Judicial System in India and the United Kingdom.
International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 5(2), pp.1-9.

5. Iyer, R. (2016). A Quasi-comparative Study of Judicial System in India & UK. SSRN Electronic
Journal.

6. Srivastava, R. (2014). A Comparative Study of Judicial System in India & UK. International
Journal of Scientific Research, 3(7), pp. 115-118.

7. Patil, S. (2013). Comparative Study of Judicial System in India & UK. International Journal of
Engineering and Technology, 3(2), pp. 81-87.