In India, Judicial Review implies

Correct Option: the power of the Judiciary to pronounce upon the constitutionality of laws and executive orders.

Explanation:

In India, Judicial Review refers to the power of the Judiciary (specifically the Supreme Court and the High Courts) to examine the constitutional validity of legislative enactments and executive orders passed by the government.

If any law, rule, or executive action is found to be violative of the provisions of the Constitution of India (such as violating Fundamental Rights guaranteed under Part III), the Judiciary has the power to declare such a law or order as unconstitutional, void, and unenforceable.

Let us analyze why the other options are incorrect:

1. Judiciary questioning the wisdom of laws: The Judiciary does not review or challenge the legislative wisdom or political policy behind a law; it only evaluates whether the law complies with constitutional principles.

2. Reviewing enactments before Presidential assent: The Judiciary only reviews laws and executive orders after they have been enacted/issued and challenged before the courts, not prior to Presidential assent.

3. Reviewing its own judgements: While the Supreme Court has the power to review its own previous judgments (under Article 137 of the Constitution), this specific procedure is termed "Review Petition" / "Curative Petition", whereas the broader constitutional doctrine of "Judicial Review" specifically refers to overseeing legislative and executive acts.