Probably the most important role journals play is forming our archive of knowledge. Obviously, the accuracy and quality of the material contained in this archive is of central importance. Peer review serves as one of the most important mechanisms for validating the information contained in these journals. The relevance of peer review clearly varies among the different functions of journals. Peer review is generally seen as vital for the roles of forming an archive of knowledge and distributing rewards. The practice of peer review is to ensure that good science is published. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is carried out on all reputable scientific journals. Peer review process adopted by JU Journals not only acts as a filter but also plays a vital role to increase the quality of research submitted for journal publications. Because of its mentoring nature JU peer review process also helps author(s) to remove any errors or gaps in manuscript mistakenly overlooked and assist in making the research more applicable in real time. Respected for its International reputation, the editorial and reviewer boards of JU Journals comprised experts with not only having the academic background but also the researchers serving the industry. For indepth review, at least two outside referees are consulted. Reviewers are contacted before being sent a paper and are asked to return comments within 1 to 2 weeks for most papers. Reviewers may be selected to evaluate separate components of a manuscript. We greatly appreciate the time spent in preparing a review, and will consult you on a revision of a manuscript only if we believe the paper has been significantly improved but still requires input. All our editorial and reviewer board members are dedicated to ensure the validity and originality of journal publications. In order to ensure that only non-plagiarized, original and high quality research publications each manuscript is assigned to at least three editors and each editor is assigned not more than two manuscripts. This is to ensure that editors are not overburdened with the review of assigned papers. Each editor further assigns manuscript to multiple reviewers. Our editors are well known experts in their respective areas and we have seen that our editors sometimes assign a manuscript to two to five reviewers depending upon availability of their peers. Reviewers assess the manuscript for critical analysis, comparative analysis and most importantly for integrity and novelty of research work. Each manuscript is evaluated through concrete parameters set by JU Journals and editorial board members. These parameters reflect different aspects of the submitted manuscript including the research quality, paper formatting and more importantly reference/citations. Once the reviewers submit review comments of the paper then the relevant (assigned) editor analyses the review comments and submit his remarks to Editor In Chief (EIC). Similarly all editors who are assigned manuscripts follow the same procedure. At the end EIC ensures that at least three review comments (from reviewers) and editors’ remarks are submitted for each paper in order to make the final decision of the manuscript.