Test: Appeals, Revisions and Review (CrPC) - CLAT PG MCQ

The review process under the CrPC is limited primarily to correcting clerical or arithmetical errors in the judgment. Unlike appeals, which can challenge substantive issues and evidence, reviews do not allow for a re-evaluation of evidence or a complete reassessment of the case. They are intended to address specific mistakes rather than to re-litigate the original case.

Appeals from acquittal can only be made on specific grounds, primarily when there is a gross miscarriage of justice or incorrect application of law. The law requires that the State or complainants seek leave from the court to proceed with such appeals, making it a more stringent process compared to appeals from conviction.

A revisional court cannot convert an acquittal into a conviction. This is a fundamental restriction in the CrPC designed to protect the rights of the accused and ensure that the acquittal stands unless there are substantial procedural irregularities or jurisdictional errors that warrant a different approach.

The 2008 Amendment to the CrPC significantly enhanced victims' rights by allowing them to appeal against acquittals and inadequate compensation without needing leave of court. This change reflects a shift towards recognizing the interests of victims in the criminal justice process, ensuring they have a voice in the outcomes of cases that affect them.

The primary purpose of filing an appeal under the CrPC is to challenge a lower court's judgment before a higher court. This process allows the appellant to seek a reversal or modification of the lower court's decision based on identified errors in law or fact. Unlike a new trial, an appeal focuses on whether the legal process was correctly followed and if the judgment can be overturned.

The primary purpose of an appeal under the CrPC is to correct errors in law or fact made by a lower court. It allows a higher court to review the lower court's decision and determine whether the judgment should be reversed or modified. Appeals are not about re-evaluating evidence unless there has been a gross miscarriage of justice. This process is essential for maintaining the integrity of the judicial system by allowing for oversight of lower court rulings.

Under the amended provisions, specifically following the 2008 Amendment to the CrPC, victims have the right to appeal against acquittals, convictions for lesser offenses, and inadequate compensation without needing the court's permission. This change was made to enhance the rights of victims within the criminal justice system, acknowledging their stake in the outcome of legal proceedings and ensuring they have a voice in the appeals process.

The process of revision is distinct from that of an appeal in that it serves as a supervisory power to correct jurisdictional errors or serious irregularities in the proceedings of lower courts, rather than addressing the merits of a case as appeals do. Revisions do not allow for the conversion of an acquittal into a conviction and are not intended to re-evaluate evidence like appeals. This difference is crucial for understanding how various mechanisms of judicial review operate within the legal framework.