1

JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

FACULTY OF LAW

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE - II

ON
APPEAL & REVISION

SUBMITTED TO: - SUBMITTED BY: -

Dr. MOHAMMAD ASAD MALIK MOHAMMAD SHAHBAZ
(CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE – II) B.A.LLB (HONS)
SEM-IX, SEC-B
 2

Acknowledgment

Exchange of ideas generates new objects to work in a better way. Whenever a person
is helped and co-operated by others, his heart is bound to pay gratitude and obligation
to them.

I would like to thank my teacher Dr. MOHAMMAD ASAD MALIK and my PARENTS for
providing me with invaluable support and guidance which led to the completion and
conception of this project.
 3

SYNOPSIS

 APPEAL: CHAPTER XXXIX SECTION 372 – 394 of Cr.PC

 Introduction
 Section 374: Appeals from Convictions
 No Right of Appeal
 Appeal for Enhancement of Sentence
 Appeal in Case of Acquittal
 Power of appellate court in Appeal against Acquittal
 Section 379- Appeal against Conviction by High Court
 Section 380- Special Right of Appeal
 Form of Appeal
 Section 382- Petition of Appeal
 Section 383- Appeal from Jail
 Section 384- Summary Dismissal of Appeal or Dismissal in Limine
 Section 385- Procedure for Hearing of the Appeal
 Powers of Appellate Court

 REVISION: SETIONS 397 to 401 OF Cr.PC

 Introduction
 Circumstances in which retrial may be ordered
 Revisional Jurisdiction
 Limitations
 Caes Laws

 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APPEAL AND REVISION

 4

APPEAL

INTRODUCTION

The term “appeal” has not been defined in the code. According to the dictionary meaning, an
appeal is a complaint or grievance to a superior court for reconsideration or review of a decision,
verdict or sentence of a lower court1. It has been said that every human being is fallible and a judge
is not an exception. It is thus possible that even a judge may err or commit mistake and his decision
may be wrong or faulty. Article 25 of the Constitution of India guarantees life and liberty to every
citizen, small or big, rich or poor, as one of the Fundamental Rights. It is therefore, necessary that
a person aggrieved by an order of the court of the first instance may be able to challenge it by
preferring an appeal. An appeal is a method of correction of manly error or solution of human
frailty.

CHAPTER XXXIX (SECTION 372 – 394 of Cr.PC) DEALS WITH APPEALS.

A right of Appeal is not a natural or inherent right. It is a statutory right and must be governed by
the statute which grants it2.

SECTION 372

Provides, no appeal lies except otherwise provided by the Code or by any other law for the time
being in force. Under Articles 132, 134 and 136 of the Constitution of India, it may be possible to
present an appeal to the Supreme Court against the order of acquittal passed by the High Court.

SECTION 373: APPLIES TO APPEALS FROM

1. Orders requiring security for keeping peace or good behavior and

2. Against order refusing to accept or rejecting to accept or rejecting a surety under s. 121.

1
BLACK’S LAW DICTIONARY, (4TH edn.), p.124
2
Akalu v. Ram Deo, AIR 1973 SC 2145
 5

The appeal lies to Court of Session, except, of course, in cases where under sub-s. (2) Or (4) of S.
122, the proceedings are already laid before the Session Judge.

SECTION 374: APPEALS FROM CONVICTIONS

 Any person convicted on a trial held by a High Court in its extraordinary original criminal
jurisdiction may appeal to the Supreme Court.
 Any person convicted on a trial held by a Sessions Judge or an Additional Sessions Judge
or on a trial held by any other Court in which a sentence of imprisonment for more than
seven years [has been passed against him or against any other person convicted at the same
trial]; may appeal to the High Court
 Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2), any person,
 convicted on a trial held by a Metropolitan Magistrate or Assistant Sessions Judge
or Magistrate of the first class, or of the second class,
 sentenced under section 325, or
 in respect of whom an order has been made or a sentence has been passed under
section 360 by any Magistrate, may appeal to the Court of Session.

While disposing of appeals from the sentences of the Sessions Court under this Section, the High
Court should specify the reasons for rejection of appeal and should not reject it summarily. This
will enable the Supreme Court to know the view of the High Court, in case the appellant moves
the Supreme Court in appeal. For computing the sentence of imprisonment for seven years for the
purpose of ascertaining the appellate forum under Section 374 (2), the sentence in default of
payment of a fine is not to be added to the substantive sentence of imprisonment.

An appeal from an order of acquittal must be filed within the period of limitation prescribed by
Article 114 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963. For the extension of the period of
limitation, and for exclusion of time in computing the period of limitation, Sections 5 and 12 of
the Limitation Act, 1963 would be useful.
 6

NO RIGHT OF APPEAL

Section 375 and 376 bar appeals in certain cases, though a provision of Revision is
maintainable3.

Thus, no appeal shall lie-

 Where a High Court passes a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding six months or fine
not exceeding one thousand rupees or both;
 Where a Court of Session or a Metropolitan Magistrate passes a sentence of imprisonment
not exceeding three months or fine not exceeding two hundred rupees or both;
 Where a Magistrate of the First Class passes a sentence of fine not exceeding one hundred
rupees; or
 Where in a summary case, a Magistrate passes a sentence of fine not exceeding two
hundred rupees.

APPEAL FOR ENHANCEMENT OF SENTENCE

Section 377 confers right on the Government to file an appeal against the inadequacy of sentence
awarded by any court other than a High court. If the sentence appears to be manifestly inadequate
resulting in failure of justice, the appellate court can interfere with it and can enhance the sentence.
But at the same time, the high court can also exercise its revisional jurisdiction, Suo motto call for
the record and enhance the sentence in appropriate cases after giving an opportunity to the
accused4.The appellate court must pass a speaking order for enhancing the sentence. A bold
statement that the ends of justice demanded enhancement of sentence was held insufficient by
courts.

An appeal under Section 377 must be filed by the State within a period of 60 days and the
contention of the State that it was under a mistaken belief that period of limitation is ninety days
would be no excuse for condonation of the delay.

3
Appeal (crl.) 320 of 2001
4
Bachan Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 267
 7

APPEAL IN CASE OF ACQUITTAL

Under Articles 132, 134 and 136 of the Constitution of India, it may be possible to present an
appeal to the Supreme Court against the order of acquittal passed by the High Court5.

An appeal from an order of acquittal must be filed within the period of limitation prescribed by
Article 114 of the Schedule of the Limitation Act, 1963. For the extension of the period of
limitation, and for exclusion of time in computing the period of limitation, Sections 5 and 12 of
the Limitation Act, 1963 would be useful.

Appeal against an order of acquittal is an extraordinary remedy. In exercising this power, the High
Court should give proper weight and consideration to “Very substantial and compelling reasons”.

“Very substantial and compelling reasons” exist when:

 The trial court’s conclusion with regard to the facts is palpably wrong;
 The trial court’s decision was based on an incorrect view of law;
 The trial court’s judgment is likely to result in “grave miscarriage of justice”;
 The entire approach of the trial court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal;
 The trial court’s judgment was manifestly unjust and unreasonable;
 The trial court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has ignored
material documents like dying declarations/ report of the Ballistic expert, etc.
 This list is intended to be illustrative, not exhaustive.

The Appellate Court must always give proper weight and consideration to the findings of the trial
court. If two reasonable views can be reached – one that leads to acquittal, the other to conviction
– the High Court’s or appellate courts must rule in favour of the accused.

POWERS OF APPELLATE COURT IN APPEAL AGAINST ACQUITTAL

In Chandrappa & Others v. State of Karnataka 6, Supreme Court held:

5
AIR 1963 SC 200
6
(2007) 4 SCC 415
 8

1. An appellate court has full power to review, re-appreciate and reconsiders the evidence
upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
2. The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on the
exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own
conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
3. Various expressions, such as, “substantial and compelling reasons”, “good and sufficient
grounds”, “very strong circumstances”, “distorted conclusions”, “glaring mistakes”, etc.
are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against
acquittal. Such phraseology are more in the nature of “flourishes of language” to emphasize
reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the
court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
4. An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double
presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to
him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be
presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly,
the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further
reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
5. If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the
appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.”

SECTION 379: APPEAL AGAINST CONVICTION BY HIGH COURT IN CERTAIN

CASES7

Where the High Court has, on appeal, reversed an order of acquittal of an accused person and
convicted him and sentenced him to death or to imprisonment for life or to imprisonment for a
term of ten years or more, he may appeal to the Supreme Court.

An appeal to would lie to the Supreme Court as a matter of right when High Court, on appeal,

1. Reversed an order of Acquittal of an accused person and

7
AIR 1964 SC 286
 9

2. Convicted and sentenced him to death or to imprisonment for life or to imprisonment for a
term of ten years or more8.

In other cases, appeal can be filed, if the High Court certifies that the case is a fit one for appeal to
the Supreme Court. Only grave injustice manifest on record can induce the Supreme Court to
interfere with the concurrent finding of guilt of Courts below. The Court would be slow in
reversing the finding entered by the High Court unless there is a perverse and erroneous
appreciation of evidence. If the High Court, for acquitting the accused has given certain tenable
reasons, the Supreme Court would not be justified in interfering with such acquittal9. The word
“acquittal” doesn’t mean that the trial must have ended in a complete acquittal but would also
include the case where an accused has been acquitted of the charge of murder and has been
convicted of a lesser offense10.

SECTION 380: SPECIAL RIGHT OF APPEAL IN CERTAIN CASES

Notwithstanding anything contained in this Chapter, when more persons than one are convicted in
one trial, and an appealable judgment or order has been passed in respect of any of such person,
all or any of the persons convicted at such trial shall have a right of appeal.

FORM OF APPEAL

SECTION 382: PETITION OF APPEAL

Every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing presented by the appellant or his
pleader, and every such petition shall (unless the Court to which it is presented otherwise directs)
be accompanied by a copy of the judgment or order appealed against. A copy of the judgment or
order means a certified copy. The court has, however, discretion to dispense with the copy of the
judgment11.

8
Chandra Mohan Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1992 SC 891.
9
Vijaybhai Bhanabhai Patel v. Navnitbhai Nathubhai Patel, (2004) 10 SCC 583.
10
Tarachand Damu v. State of Maharashtra, 1962 AIR 130.
11
State of U.P. v. Tobit, AIR 1958 SC 414
 10

SECTION 383: APPEAL FROM JAIL

Where a convict is in jail and intends to challenge his conviction, he can file an appeal from jail
by presenting it to the officer in charge of the jail. It is the duty of the jail officer to forward such
appeal to an appropriate court. No Jail Appeal can be dismissed without affording the reasonable
opportunity to the appellate court of being heard.

SECTION 384: SUMMARY DISMISSAL OF APPEAL OR DISMISSAL IN LIMINE

 If upon examining the petition of appeal and copy of the judgment received under section
382 or section 383, the Appellate Court considers that there is no sufficient ground for
interfering, it may dismiss the appeal summarily.

DISMISSAL IN LIMINE (U/S 384)

The Appellate court’s power to dismiss an appeal must be exercised sparingly and with
great circumspection. The Apex court has dealt with cases where the summary dismissal
of criminal appeal is permissible. Even if the records of the case are destroyed or is not
available, it would justify acquittal. Bolin v. Jagdish12& State v. Abhai Roy13

SECTION 385: Procedure for hearing of the appeal which has been admitted and not
dismissed summarily under Section 384.

The section lays down the procedure for hearing of the appeal which has been admitted and not
dismissed summarily under Section 384.

An order of the High Court setting aside the acquittal of the accused in appeal without notice
having been sent to the accused was held to be illegal. The accused must be heard and his
appearance must be ensured while disposing of the appeal.

12
(2005) AIR 2005 SC 1872
13
(2004)4 SCC 6
 11

Where the appeal is not dismissed summarily under Section 384, the Appellate Court is bound to
call for the record if such record has not already been sent by the Court and then give a hearing to
the parties However, the Court may dispose of the appeal even without asking for the record where
the appeal is only as to the legality of the sentence.

POWERS OF APPELLATE COURT

SECTION 386 Of the Code specifies powers of the appellate court. It provides that after persuing
the record and after hearing the parties, the court may dismiss the appeal, allow the appeal or pass
any other order that may appear to it be just and proper.

It includes appeal –

 Against Acquittal
 Against conviction
 For enhancement of sentence
 From other orders

Clause (d) of section 386 applies to all orders other than that of conviction, or of acquittal, or for
enhancement of sentence. The power which the appellate court possess is of alteration or reversal
of the order of the lower court14. According to Section 386(e) of the Code, the appellate Court may
make any amendment or any consequential or incidental order that may be just or proper.

14
Gul Zaman v. Emperor AIR 1943 Pes 6.
 12

REVISION

INTRODUCTION

Revision is the act of examining again in order to remove any defect or grant relief against irregular
or improper exercise or non-exercise of jurisdiction by a lower court. Revision is like re-working
and re-writing. Revision, meaning "to see again," takes place during the entire writing process as
we change words, rewrite sentences, and shift paragraphs from one location to another in our essay.
Revision means the action of revising, especially critical or careful examination or perusal with a
view to correcting or improving.

SETIONS 397 to 401 OF Cr.PC DEALS WITH REVISION

In cases where no appeal has been provided by law or in cases where the remedy of appeal has for
any reason failed to secure fair justice the criminal procedure code15 provides for another kind of
review procedure, viz. revision. Revision lies both in pending and decided cases and it can be filed
before a High Court or a Court of Session. Very wide discretionary powers have been conferred
on the Sessions Court and the High Court.

The object of the revision is to confer upon superior criminal courts a kind of paternal or
supervisory jurisdiction in order to correct miscarriage of justice arising from misconception of
law, irregularity of procedure, neglect of proper precautions of apparent harshness of treatment
which has resulted on the one hand in some injury to the due maintenance of law and order, or on
the other hand in some undeserved hardship to individuals.

The purpose of revision is to enable the revision court to satisfy itself as to the correctness, legality
or propriety of any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed and as to the regularity of any
proceedings of the inferior criminal court.

The revisional jurisdiction is derived from three sources :-

(1) Section 397 to 401 of the Cr.PC;

(2) Article 227 of the Constitution of India;

15
(in short Cr.PC)
 13

(3) The power to issue the writ of certiorari.

Under Section 397(1) of the Cr.PC, the High Court or any Sessions Judge may call for and examine
the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court situate within its or his local
jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying itself or himself as to the correctness, legality or propriety
of any finding, Sentence or order, recorded or passed, and as to the regularity of any Proceedings
of such inferior Court, and may, when calling for such record, direct that the execution of any
Sentence order be suspended, and if the accused is in confinement, that he be released on bail or
on his own bond pending the examination of the record.

Under Section 398 Cr.PC, the revision Court may make an order for further inquiry. Further
inquiry entails supplemental inquiry upon fresh evidence. The power under Section 398, Cr.PC is
not co-extensive with Section 397, Cr.PC but extends far wider as the record can ‘otherwise’ be
examined by the revision Court without recourse to Section 397, Cr.PC.

Section 399, Cr.PC deals with Sessions Judge’s power of revision. Under sub section (1), the
Sessions Judge, in the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by himself
under Section 397(1), may exercise all or any of the powers which are exercisable by the High
Court under Section 401(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Section 401(1) of the Cr.PC reads as follows: - In the case of any proceeding the record of which
has been called for by itself or which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may, in
its discretion, exercise any of the powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by Sections 386, 389,
390 and 391 or on a Court of Session by Section 307 and, when the Judges composing the Court
of revision are equally divided in opinion, the case shall be disposed of in the manner provided by
Section 392.

The Allahabad High Court in Om Pratap Singh vs. State 16 has observed: - the revisional power
of this Court under Sections 397 and 401, Cr.PC is a kind of supervisory jurisdiction in order to
prevent miscarriage of justice arising from the mis-conception of law or irregularity of procedure
committed by the subordinate Courts. These two Sections do not confer unfettered jurisdiction on
this Court for reappraisal of evidence. In fact, the revisional power of this Court is to see that
justice is done in accordance with the recognized rules of criminal jurisprudence and the

16
1995 Cr LJ 3887
 14

subordinate Courts do not exceed their jurisdiction or abuse their powers vested in them under the
Code of Criminal Procedure.

High Court in a revision is empowered to interfere with an order of acquittal and direct fresh trail.
While High Court sitting in appeal under Section 386 of the code, can convert finding of acquittal
into one conviction, Section 401, subsection (3) debars conversion of acquittal into conviction.
High Court, however, would not disturb a finding of fact unless it appears that trail court shut out
any evidence, or overlooked any material evidence or admitted inadmissible evidence or where
there has been manifest error on a point of fact.

Circumstances in which retrial may be ordered, without being exhaustive are:

(i) Where trail court has no jurisdiction to try a case;

(ii) Where trail court has wrongly shut out evidence which prosecution sought to produce;

(iii) Where material evidence has been overlooked;

(iv) Where acquittal is based on a compounding of the offence which is invalid under law;

(v) Where the appellate court has wrongly held evidence admitted by trail court as inadmissible.

In State of Maharashtra vs. Jagmohan Singh Kuldip Singh and Others17, the Supreme Court has
held: - ‘in exercise of revisional power High Court cannot undertake in-depth and minute re-
examination of entire evidence and upset concurrent findings of trail court and appellate court.'

Where accused was acquitted without considering material evidence with inconsistent and faulty
reasoning and probative value of FIR was also ignored, High Court was justified in directing retrial
(Ayodhya Dube vs. Ram Sumer Singh18).

WHO CAN INVOKE THE REVISIONAL JURISDICTION?

Section 397(1) of the Cr.PC does not say on whose motion Court may call for the records of the
lower Court, but subsection (3) indicates that an aggrieved party may make an application. So far
as High Court is concerned, Section 401(1) expressly authorizes the court to exercise power of

17
2004 (7) SCC 659
18
AIR 1981 SC 1415
 15

revision suo motu apart from the application from a party. The complainant is entitled to move a
revision even if state does not. When there was acquittal of the accused that was charged on a
police report and the state did not file an appeal against it, the informant, since he had no right of
appeal against the order, was held to be competent to apply for a revision.

The revisional jurisdiction when involved by a private complainant against an order of acquittal
ought not to be exercised lightly and that it could be exercised only in exceptional case where the
interest of public justice require interference for the correction of a manifest illegality or the
prevention of a gross miscarriage of justice Kaptan Singh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh19

LIMITATIONS

 Section 399(3) of Cr.PC provides that in a case where any application for revision is made
by or on behalf of any person before the Sessions Judge, no further proceeding by way of
revision at the instance of such person shall be entertained by the High Court.

Suppose a proceeding under Section 145 Cr.PC between X and Y terminated before the
magistrate in favor of X. The criminal revision of Y before the Sessions Judge was
dismissed. A criminal revision before the High Court at the instance of Y shall not be
entertained. In the same illustration if Y’s criminal revision before the Sessions Judge was
allowed, a criminal revision to the High Court against the order of the Sessions Judge at
the instance of X is maintainable.

 In a case where under the Code of Criminal Procedure an appeal lies but no appeal is
brought, then according to Sub-section (4) of Section 401, no proceeding by way of
revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed.

19
(1997) 4 supreme 211).
 16

While Courts might have expressed different view on the scope of the bar under Sub-
section (4) of Section 401, there can be no dispute that Suo motu power of the court is not
at all affected by the bar in sub-section (4) of Section 401.

Whether where a power is exercised under Section 397 of Cr.PC, the High Court could
exercise those very powers under Section 482, Cr.PC.

Inherent power of the Court can be exercised when there is no remedy provided in the Code
of Criminal Procedure for redressal of the grievance. It is true that Section 397(2) clearly
bars the jurisdiction of the Court in respect of interlocutory orders passed in appeal, inquiry
or other proceedings. The matter is however, no longer res integra as the entire controversy
has been set at rest by a decision of the Apex Court in Madhu Limaye v. State of
Maharashtra20, the word 'interlocutory' was further defined and the reference of the case
of Amar Nath (supra) was also made therein. The proposition of law that the summoning
order was not an interlocutory order (as laid down in the case of Amar Nath (1977 Cri LJ
1891)) (supra), was affirmed in this judgment also. The Apex Court held that such type of
order (order issuing summon to accused) is surely not interlocutory so as to attract the bar
of sub-section (2) of Section 397, Cr. P.C. but it was an intermediary order.

In the case of Raj Kapoor vs. State 21, Justice Krishna Iyer, while distinguishing the power
of the High Court under Section 397 vis-a-vis Section 482 of Cr. PC observed that Section
397 or any of the provisions of Cr.PC will not affect the amplitude of the inherent power
preserved in Section 482.

In Amar Nath v. State of Haryana22, the interlocutory order was defined. The Apex Court
held that the orders which are matters of moment and which affect or adjudicate the rights
of the accused or a particular aspect of the trial cannot be said to be interlocutory order so
as to be outside the purview of the revisional jurisdiction. The facts of the case were that

20
1978 SCC (Cri) 10: (1978 Cri LJ 165).
21
(1980) 1 SCC 43
22
1977 SCC (Cri) 585: (1977 Cri LJ 1891).
 17

Magistrate had issued summons to accused and it was held that the order was not an
interlocutory order and can be revised under Section 397 Cr. P.C.

The Apex Court in Mohit vs. State of UP 23, observed that any order which substantially
affects the right of the accused, or decides certain rights of the parties cannot be said to be
an interlocutory order so as to bar a revision to the High Court against that order. Orders
summoning witnesses, adjourning cases, passing orders for bail, calling for reports and
such other steps in aid of the pending proceeding, may no doubt amount to interlocutory
orders against which no revision would lie under Section 397(2) of the 1973 Code. But
orders which are matters of moment and which affect or adjudicate the rights of the accused
or a particular aspect of the trail cannot be said to be interlocutory order so as to be outside
the purview of the revisional jurisdiction of the High Court.

'In Rajendra Kumar Sitaram Pande v. Uttam24, the reference of the case of Amar Nath
(1977 Cri LJ 1891) (supra) and Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra, (1978 Cri LJ 165)
(supra) and V. C. Shukla v. State, 1980 SCC (Cri) 695 : (1980 Cri LJ 690) was also made
and the Apex Court came to the conclusion that order issuing summons to accused must be
held to be intermediate or quasi-final and, therefore, the revisional jurisdiction under
Section 397, Cr. P.C. could be exercised against the same.

'These are the few judgments, which are cited above laying down this law since 1977 that
order issuing summons is revisable under Section 397 Cr. P.C. It is really a very sorry state
of affair that a Sessions Judge who is heading the district judiciary, is in utter ignorance of
the basic principle of the law so elaborately pronounced by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Now
the judicial officers in this State are provided with residential library and necessary grant
is also placed at the disposal of the Sessions Judge to contribute a number of journals but
probably the Sessions Judges has hardly any time to look into such journal to apprise
themselves with such an established principle of law. If this is the standard of knowledge

23
(2013) 7 SCC, 789
24
1999 SCC (Cri) 393 : (1999 Cri LJ 1620).
 18

at this level, what guidance can be expected by the Sessions Judge to his subordinate
officers and especially the officers who join the services afresh.'

 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LEGAL TERMS APPEAL AND REVISION.

Though “appeal” and “revision” appear to be similar legal terms, there are certain subtle
differences between them. The distinction between an appeal and a revision is a real one.

Appeal: There is no definition of the word “appeal” in any statute. It can be defined as the judicial
examination by a higher Court of a decision of an inferior Court. It is a legal proceeding by which
a case is brought before a higher court for review of the decision of a lower court. Appeal is a
process of re-examination by a higher court of the judgment, or the order or the decision made by
a lower court in a suit or in a case. Appeal is the right of entering a superior court and invoking its
aid and interposition to redress the error of the court below. It is a proceeding taken before a
superior court for reversing or modifying the decision of an inferior court on ground of error.

The expression “appeal” has not been defined in the code, but it may be defined as “the judicial
examination of the decision by a higher court of the decision of an inferior court”.

Revision: Revision is the act of examining again in order to remove any defect or grant relief
against irregular or improper exercise or non-exercise of jurisdiction by a lower court. Revision is
like re-working and re-writing. Revision, meaning "to see again," takes place during the entire
writing process as we change words, rewrite sentences, and shift paragraphs from one location to
another in our essay. Revision means the action of revising, especially critical or careful
examination or perusal with a view to correcting or improving.

In Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.), the provisions relating to appeal are contained in Sections
372 to 394, while provisions relating to revision are contained in Sections 397 to 405.

In Civil Procedure Code (CPC), the provisions relating to appeal are contained in Sections 96 to
112, while provisions relating to revision are contained in Section 115.
 19

The distinction between the appeal and revision in the following25:

(1) An appeal lies to a superior court, which may not necessary be a High Court, while a revision
application under the code lies only to the High Court.

(2) An appeal lies only from the decrees and appealable order, but a revision application lies from
any decision of a court subordinate to the High Court from which no appeal lies to the High Court
or to any subordinate court.

(3) A right of appeal is a substantive right conferred by the statute, while the revisional power of
the High Court is purely discretionary.

(4) An appeal abates if the legal representatives of a deceased party are not brought on record
within the prescribed period. A revision application however does not abate in such case. The High
Court may at any time bring the proper parties on the record of the case.

(5) The grounds for an appeal and revision application are also different. An appeal lies on a
question of fact or law or of fact and law, while a revision application lies only on the ground of
jurisdictional error.

(6) In case of appeal the memorandum of appeal must be filed before the appellate court by the
aggrieved party, but filing of an application is not necessary in case of revision.

(7) Ordinarily appellate jurisdiction involves rehearing on question of law as well as on facts of
the case whereas revisional jurisdiction involves only the question of law and this jurisdiction is
never considered a rehearing.

(8) An appeal is considered to be a consideration of the original proceeding whereas unlike appeal
revisional is not the constitution of the original proceeding.

25
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/forum/What-is-the-difference-between-appeal-and-revision--31806.asp
 20

(9) An appeal is a right based remedy and can be claimed as of right if there is statutory existence
of it, where the revision is the purely discretionary remedy and cannot be claimed as of right.

In case of Hari Shanker v. Rao Girdhari Lal Chowdhur,26, the Supreme Court highlighted the
distinction between appeal and revision as under:

“The distinction between an appeal and a revision is a real one. A right of appeal carries with it a
right of rehearing on law as well as fact, unless the statute conferring the right of appeal limits the
rehearing in some way as, we find, has been done in second appeals arising under the Code of
Civil Procedure. The power to hear a revision is generally given to a superior court so that it may
satisfy itself that a particular case has been decided according to law.”

Likewise, in Lachhman Dass v. Santokh Singh,27 the Supreme Court held as under:

“…an appeal is a continuation of a suit or proceedings wherein the entire proceedings are again
left open for consideration by the appellate authorities which has the power to review the entire
evidence subject, of course, to the prescribed statutory limitations. But in the case of revision
whatever powers the revisional authority may have, it has no power to reassess and reappreciate
the evidence unless the statute expressly confers on it that power. That limitation is implicit in the
concept of revision.”

In the case of State of Kerala v. K.M. Charia Abdullah & Co.,28 the Supreme Court observed as
under:

“When the legislature confers a right of appeal in one case and a discretionary remedy of revision
in another, it must be deemed to have created two jurisdictions different in scope and content.
When it introduced the familiar concepts of appeal and revision, it is also reasonable to assume
that the well-known distinction between these two jurisdictions was also accepted by the
legislature. There is an essential distinction between an appeal and a revision. The distinction is
based on differences implicit in the said two expressions. An appeal is a continuation of the

26
AIR 1963 SC 698: 1962 Supp (1) SCR 933
27
(1995) 4 SCC 201
28
(1965) 1 SCR 601, 604: AIR 1965 SC 1585
 21

proceedings; in effect the entire proceedings are before the Appellate Authority and it has power
to review the evidence subject to the statutory limitations prescribed. But in the case of a revision,
whatever powers the revisional authority may or may not have, it has not the power to review the
evidence unless the statute expressly confers on it that power. That limitation is implicit in the
concept of revision.”

In Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand,29 the Supreme Court held as under:

“It appears that the learned Single Judge has equated appellate powers with revisional powers, and
that the core difference between an appeal and a revision has been overlooked. It is trite legal
position that appellate jurisdiction is coextensive with original court’s jurisdiction as for appraisal
and appreciation of evidence and reaching findings on facts and appellate court is free to reach its
own conclusion on evidence untrammeled by any finding entered by the trial court. Revisional
powers on the other hand belong to supervisory jurisdiction of a superior court. While exercising
revisional powers the court has to confine to the legality and propriety of the findings and also
whether the subordinate court has kept itself within the bounds of its jurisdiction including the
question whether the court has failed to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it. Though the difference
between the two jurisdictions is subtle, it is quite real and has now become well recognised in legal
provinces.”

Similarly, in the case of Neta Ram v. Jiwan Lal,30 it was observed that the revisional jurisdiction
of the High Court does not include the power to reverse concurrent findings, without showing how
those findings are erroneous.

CONCLUSION

An appeal is a creature of statute and the power and jurisdiction of the appellate court must be
circumscribed by the words of the statute. At the same time, a court of appeal is a ‘court of
error’ and its normal function is to correct the decision appealed from if necessary, and its

29
(1998) 1 SCC 687: AIR 1998 SC 596: (1998) 91 Comp Cas 361 : 1998 Cri LJ 856
30
AIR 1963 SC 499: 1962 Supp (2) SCR 623
 22

jurisdiction should be co-extensive with that of the trial court. It cannot and ought not to do
something which the trial court was not competent to do.

Review and revision, these are two legal concepts and the recent pronouncements have created
some confusion regarding their respective contours and maintainability, hence ought to be
addressed at the very outset.

Review is done by the court passing an order whereas revision lies to a superior court; secondly,
the purpose of review is to correct an error apparent on the face of record whereas revision lies on
question of law or a mixed question of fact and law.
 23

Bibliography
 Contemporary criminal Law; Concepts, cases, and controversies, Matthew lippman, SAGE
Publications, United States of America, 1st Edition, 2007
 Contemporary criminal Law; Concepts, cases, and controversies, Matthew lippman, SAGE
Publications, United States of America, 2nd Edition, 2010
 Criminal Procedure, R. V. Kelkar, Eastern Book Company, Lucknow, 4th Edition, 2001
 Fundamental of Criminal Law, Paul H. Robinson, Little, Brown and Company, Canada,
2nd Edition, 2007
 Sarkar On the Law of Criminal Procedure, S. C. Sarkar, Wadhwa And Law Company, New
Delhi, 9th Edition, 2007
 Woodroffe, Commentaries on Code of Criminal Procedure, sir Jhon Woodroffe, Law
Publishers (india) Pvt. Ltd., Allahabad, 3rd Edition, 2009

Links
 http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/criminology/code-of-criminal-
procedore.php#ixzz3WSYiWXlY
 http://www.powershow.com/view1/10ef2cZDc1Z/CRIMINAL_PROCEDURE_CODE_1973_po
werpoint_ppt_presentation
 http://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/177rptp1.pdf

-**-