Difference between Criminal Appeal and Criminal Revision

The criminal justice system holds significant implications for an individual's life, particularly in relation to their right to life and personal liberty. The fallibility inherent in any human-built institution also applies to the decisions made by courts. To prevent potential miscarriages of justice, specific provisions must be in place to scrutinize the decisions of lower courts. In response to this need, both appeal and revision procedures have been incorporated into criminal procedure legislation. The CrPC provides detailed provisions on appeals from Section 372 to Section 394, but some cases do not have a right to appeal. The Legislators bore this in mind and to prevent miscarriage of justice in such cases, the CrPC includes a review procedure called revision from Section 397 to Section 405. While appeals are a legal right, revisions are discretionary powers of higher courts. Unlike appeals which provide one opportunity for accused to be heard before making their decision, revisions depend entirely on court discretion - according to Hari Shankar vs Rao Ghari Chowdhury decision of the Supreme Court highlighted this distinction between appeals that provide another hearing of law and facts while revision ensure that cases are decided according to law.
 

CRIMINAL APPEAL: 

Appeals are judicial examinations of decisions made by lower courts, conducted by higher courts. Although the term "appeal" is not explicitly defined in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), it can be described as a legal proceeding through which a higher court reviews the decision of a lower court. However, it is important to note that appeals may only be pursued in cases specifically provided for by statute, such as CrPC, and are subject to statutory limitations. The intention behind this principle is to uphold the competence and fairness of the trial conducted by lower courts. Exceptions exist, allowing victims to appeal in certain circumstances, including judgments of acquittal, convictions for lesser offenses, or inadequate compensation.

The process of appeals generally follows similar rules and procedures in both Sessions Courts and High Courts (the highest appellate court within a state's jurisdiction). The Supreme Court, being the highest court of appeal in the country, possesses extensive discretionary powers in appeal cases. The appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is governed by provisions within CrPC, the Indian Constitution, and the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. Individuals convicted of a crime have the right to appeal to the appropriate court, whether it be the Supreme Court, High Court, or Sessions Court, depending on the circumstances.
 

CRIMINAL REVISION: 

The term "revision" is not explicitly defined in CrPC. However, Section 397 of CrPC empowers the High Court and Sessions Judge to review and examine the records of any proceedings. This allows them to ensure the correctness, legality, and propriety of any findings, sentences, or orders, as well as the regularity of proceedings in lower courts. Additionally, they possess powers to suspend the execution of sentences or orders and to grant bail or release the accused if they are in confinement. Revisional powers are aimed at rectifying any glaring errors, jurisdictional issues, or perversity that may have occurred during the proceedings.

The High Court can initiate a revision petition on its own volition (suo moto) or through a petition filed by an aggrieved party or any interested party. Section 401 of CrPC imposes certain statutory limitations on the exercise of revisional powers by the High Court. However, the only requirement to invoke this power is the presentation of records of the proceedings before the court, following which the court exercises its discretion. The Sessions Judge possesses similar revisional powers that they can exercise on their own accord, but only for cases they have called for specifically.
 

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CRIMINAL APPEAL & CRIMINAL REVISION: 

The primary distinction between appeal and revision lies in the nature and scope of these processes. Appeals provide a legal right conferred upon parties, subject to statutory limitations, allowing for rehearing on both law and fact. In contrast, revisions are discretionary and dependent on the criminal court's discretion. While the right to appeal is available in criminal cases, revisions depend on the court's satisfaction about the need for examination and correction.
 

CONCLUSION:

Both appeal and revision are vital components of the criminal justice system, ensuring that errors or miscarriages of justice can be rectified to the extent possible. Appeals provide parties with the opportunity to challenge legal or factual errors in a lower court's decision, subject to certain limitations and statutory provisions. On the other hand, revisions grant higher courts discretionary powers to examine and rectify any mistakes or procedural irregularities in lower court proceedings. By understanding the distinctions between these processes, we can better navigate the criminal justice system and safeguard the principles of fairness and justice.

Advocate Chikirsha Mohanty

Greater Kailash - 1, Delhi
5 years

GET LEGAL HELP

GET LEGAL HELP