Abstract
This research paper undertakes a comparative study of the constitutional history and impeachment processes for the President in India and the United States, examining their colonial backgrounds, government structures, and accountability mechanisms. The colonial experience of both nations—marked by British monarchical control—influenced their present-day governance models, with India adopting a parliamentary system and the U.S. a presidential one. The analysis begins with a historical examination of these distinct trajectories, noting how America’s separation-of-powers doctrine contrasts with India’s more integrated executive-legislative structure.
The paper then explores the role of the President in both nations, underscoring the broader executive powers vested in the U.S. President compared to the largely ceremonial role of India’s President. The impeachment processes further reflect this difference, with the U.S. Constitution delineating explicit grounds—treason, bribery, and high crimes—while the Indian Constitution broadly categorizes grounds as “violations of the Constitution.” Additionally, the paper discusses procedural differences in initiating and adjudicating impeachment, highlighting the U.S. process’s reliance on the Jefferson Manual versus India’s more detailed constitutional provisions. Ultimately, this study illuminates how each country’s impeachment framework seeks to balance executive power with accountability, shaped by historical and political contexts that prioritize stability and responsible governance.
Keywords: Impeachment, Constitutional History, Presidential Power, Accountability, United States, India