Appeal and revision are terms used in court that come from the law. Even though they look the same, they are not the same. They are two different types of applications that a person can choose from after a failed court hearing. Having the right to appeal or change a court's decision has helped many people get a fair hearing. With an appeal, the case is looked at again by a different court, which could lead to a new decision.

In a revision, a high court checks to see if the law was followed and if the court had the right to rule. The losing party has a certain amount of time to file an appeal, which starts when a lower court makes a final decision. The appeal process fails if the paperwork isn't filed on time or not at all. The court decides if a case needs to be looked at again or not. It's not the party's right to have one.

The high court will only consider a rehearing if it thinks there have been illegalities and the court has not done its job. The revision process involves rewriting and reworking, which can be done at any time. As a result, a revision can be filed within 90 days of the order being questioned.

Appeal

In simple terms, an appeal is a plea that is taken to a higher court to look over the decision of a lower court. This is a legal process, so the application can't be made to the trial court. Instead, it must be made to a higher court. For example, a person who disagrees with the decision of the Magistrate Court can file an appeal with the High Court of the State, with the Court of Appeal, and so on, all the way up to the Supreme Court. After the Supreme Court makes a decision, there is no way to change it.

Sections 372–394 of the Code are in charge of Appeal. Each of these parts will be looked at in the right way. But before we get into it, it's important to know that an appeal in a criminal case can either overturn the lower court's decision or uphold it while lowering the sentence or conviction.

In the case Chandrappa vs. the State of Karnataka, the Appellate court set out the rules for appealing acquittals. The following are the rules:

When the facts of the case are clearly wrong and have led to a mistake in the way justice was done. In this case, the acquittal can be called into question. This rule was made clear in the case of Bhagirath, 35 CR LJ 1367. In a case where the trial court didn't make a clear distinction between an obvious conclusion from the facts of the case and an obvious conclusion from the facts of the case, Raothula is a good example.

When the trial court didn't take into account important evidence when making a decision, which led to a wrong decision or a miscarriage of justice. Example, Dharnadas. When the trial court made a mistake and didn't accept the facts of the case as proof. Dhulaji , , is one such case.

Revision

Revision means, in simple terms, to change or fix a decision that has already been made. It can go either way. In other words, either the trial court or the higher or supreme court can change a court's decision. The main goal of both sides is to change, fix, or look over what the trial court already decided.

The higher court has the power to change a decision, but they don't have to. This means that they don't have to change every decision that comes before them. In the case of Pranab Kumar v. the State of WB , the Supreme Court said that the litigants do not have the right to ask for a second look at the case.

Difference Between Appeal And Revision

1. Legal right to appeal or changeA person who lost in court has the right to appeal, which is written into the Constitution. Revision, on the other hand, is up to the court. This means that it can happen or it can't.
    
2. Listening in court The appeal is heard in court just like any other case, but the revision does not have to be heard in court.
    
3. Court type According to the Civil Procedure Code, a request is taken care of by a court that is better than the one before it. This means that it can't be a high court. A high court can only change something.
    
4. The power to get in the wayIn an appeal, the courts can step in in any way they want, but in a revision, they can only do so much.
    
5. The number of steps in an appeal vs. those in a revision In an appeal, there is only one step, which is the hearing of the case. In revision, though, there are two methods: a preliminary and a final one.
    
6. Keeping going An appeal is when the court case on a certain case goes on, while a revision is when the court checks to see if the law was followed during the case.
    
7. What kind of exam is involved in an appeal or a revision An appeal looks at the basics of the law and the facts. A revision, on the other hand, looks at the legal actions, jurisdiction, and procedure used to come to a decision.
    
8. Time limit In an appeal, a party has a certain amount of time to file an appeal. This time starts as soon as a lower court makes a final decision. In revision, there is no set time limit. A party can ask for it at any time, but it must be a reasonable amount of time.
    
9. FilingFor an appeal to work, the person who wants to appeal must file for it. However, filing is not required for a revision.

In State of Kerala vs. K. M. Charia Abdullah & Co. (1965), the Supreme Court said: "It must be assumed that the legislature has set up two jurisdictions that are different in scope and content when it gives a right of appeal in one case and a discretionary remedy of revision in another. " It's also possible that the lawmakers knew there was a clear difference between these two areas of law when they came up with the well-known ideas of appeal and revision. There is a big difference between an appeal and a change.

In Lachhman Dass v. Santokh Singh, the Supreme Court said that an appeal is a continuation of a proceeding in which the whole case is given to the appellate authorities, who have the power to look at all of the evidence as long as they don't go against the law. But in the case of a revision, no matter what other powers the authority has, it does not have the power to re-evaluate and re-evaluate the evidence unless the law gives it that power. In the case State of Kerala K. M. Charia Abdullah and Co. , the Supreme Court had already said the same thing (1965).

In the case of Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand (1988), the Supreme Court said that a superior court's supervisory jurisdiction includes the power to make changes. When the court uses its power to change a decision, it only has to look at the conclusions and make sure they are correct and valid. It also has to see if the lower court did what it was supposed to do and if it did it on time.

Critical Opinion
My opinion is that revision, on the other hand, gives the High Court the power to make sure that the subordinate courts stay within their jurisdiction and follow the law when they hear cases. It lets the High Court fix mistakes in jurisdiction made by lower courts and gives a person who is upset with a ruling that can't be appealed a way to try to get it changed. In other words, the High Court is given the power to make changes so that it can do its job of supervising and visiting well.

During the resolution of a particular dispute, an appeal ensures that both sides will be treated fairly under the law. It also helps to set rules of decision that will be binding on all lower courts in the judicial system, making sure that everyone is treated the same and that those whose actions bring them under the rule have some certainty and direction.

Conclusion
The powers of review and appeal that are given to crime victims are very important and necessary so that the courts can dole out fair justice. So, this calls for a fair trial. Since a certain verdict or judge may be wrong, insufficient, or even unfair, the Criminal Procedure Code has provisions for review and appeal to make sure that fair trials can be held and that justice is done for crime victims.

These powers give the people who were wronged a fair chance to be heard and present their case again, but it's important to remember that a person may keep appealing just to feel righteous. For this reason, too, the Code has put in place safeguards. An appeal can't be heard unless the leave to appeal has been given, and a revision can't always be heard, even though the High Court has the power to do so on its own. In fact, a revision can't be heard when an appeal is pending.

So, this project has shown that the powers given to crime victims are all part of the Criminal Procedure Code's plan for fair justice and trials for both the victim and the accused. These powers are very helpful for people who have been wronged by the law or who have been hurt by bad decisions.