Criminal Case Analyzer Skill
Skill Metadata
- •Skill ID: criminal_case_analyzer
- •Version: 1.0.0
- •Domain: Criminal Law (India)
- •Specialization: Systematic case analysis, strategy development
- •Dependencies: All 28 criminal law protocols
- •Effective Date: January 2025
Skill Purpose
Reusable analytical capability for systematic criminal case analysis, providing structured evaluation of:
- •Fact patterns and timelines
- •Applicable offences and ingredients
- •Evidence strength and admissibility
- •Burden of proof allocation
- •Defense and prosecution strategies
- •Risk assessment and recommendations
Input Parameters
Required Inputs:
- •Case Facts: Detailed narrative of what happened
- •Date of Incident: Determines IPC vs BNS applicability
- •Perspective: Defense or Prosecution
- •Current Stage: FIR, investigation, arrest, trial, appeal
Optional Inputs:
- •Evidence Available: Witness statements, documents, forensic reports
- •Accused Details: Background, antecedents, personal circumstances
- •Specific Questions: Targeted issues to address
Analysis Framework
Phase 1: Fact Analysis and Organization
Objective: Extract and structure key facts
Process:
1. **Chronological Timeline**: - When did each event occur? - Sequence of events leading to offence - Post-offence actions 2. **Actor Identification**: - Victim(s): Name, age, relationship to accused - Accused: Name, age, occupation, antecedents - Witnesses: Eyewitnesses, formal witnesses (police, doctor) - Third parties: Any other relevant persons 3. **Location Analysis**: - Where did offence occur? - Jurisdiction (determines police station, court) - Public vs private place (may affect offence classification) 4. **Actus Reus (Physical Act)**: - What physical act was committed? - How was it committed? (Weapon? Force? Deception?) - What was the result? (Death, injury, loss) 5. **Mens Rea (Mental State)**: - Intention to commit act? - Knowledge of consequences? - Negligence or recklessness? - Premeditation vs sudden provocation? 6. **Motive**: - Why did accused commit act? (Relevant but not essential) - Strengthens prosecution case if established
Output: Structured fact summary with timeline, actors, actus reus, mens rea
Phase 2: Offence Identification
Objective: Identify all applicable offences
Process:
1. **Determine Applicable Law**:
- If offence occurred BEFORE July 1, 2024: Use IPC 1860
- If offence occurred ON OR AFTER July 1, 2024: Use BNS 2023
- Read IL-CRIM-IPC-BNS-TRANSITION.md for mapping
2. **Primary Offence Analysis**:
- Based on actus reus and mens rea, identify main offence
- Examples:
- Death caused + intention → Murder (IPC 302 / BNS 103)
- Death caused + knowledge but no intention → Culpable homicide not amounting to murder (IPC 304 / BNS 105)
- Sexual assault → Rape (IPC 376 / BNS 64-71)
- Property taken + force → Robbery (IPC 392 / BNS 309)
3. **Related Offences**:
- Identify all additional offences committed
- Example: Rape case may include:
- Rape (IPC 376 / BNS 64)
- Criminal intimidation (IPC 506 / BNS 351)
- Wrongful confinement (IPC 342 / BNS 127)
4. **Essential Ingredients Check**:
- For each identified offence, list essential ingredients
- Read relevant protocol (e.g., IL-CRIM-MURDER.md)
- Extract ingredients from protocol
5. **Fact-to-Ingredient Mapping**:
- Map available facts to each ingredient
- Identify which ingredients are established
- Identify gaps or weaknesses
Output: List of applicable offences with ingredients and fact mapping
Phase 3: Evidence Evaluation
Objective: Assess strength and admissibility of evidence
Process:
1. **Evidence Categorization**:
**A. Oral Evidence**:
- Eyewitness testimony
- Victim statement
- Expert opinion (doctor, FSL)
- Character evidence
**B. Documentary Evidence**:
- FIR copy
- Dying declaration
- Medical reports
- Contracts, letters (in fraud/cheating cases)
**C. Electronic Evidence**:
- WhatsApp messages
- CCTV footage
- Call detail records (CDR)
- GPS data
- Social media posts
**D. Physical Evidence**:
- Weapon (murder weapon, knife)
- Stolen goods (theft/robbery cases)
- Fingerprints, DNA
- Blood-stained clothes
2. **Admissibility Analysis** (Use IL-CRIM-EVIDENCE-ADMISSIBILITY.md):
For each piece of evidence:
**Step 1: Relevancy** (Section 5 Evidence Act/BSA)
- Is it fact in issue or relevant fact?
- If not relevant → INADMISSIBLE
**Step 2: Hearsay Check** (Section 60)
- Is witness testifying to what they personally saw/heard?
- OR is it hearsay (heard from someone else)?
- If hearsay → Check exceptions (dying declaration, admission, etc.)
**Step 3: Electronic Evidence** (Section 65B)
- If electronic → Section 65B certificate required (Anvar P.V. case)
- Without certificate → INADMISSIBLE
**Step 4: Confession Check** (Sections 24-30)
- Confession to police → ALWAYS INADMISSIBLE (Section 25)
- Confession before Magistrate (Section 164) → Admissible if voluntary
**Step 5: Primary vs Secondary** (Sections 62-65)
- Original document (primary) preferred
- Photocopy (secondary) only if original unavailable (Section 65)
3. **Strength Assessment**:
**Direct Evidence**:
- Eyewitness saw accused commit crime → Strong if credible
- Check witness credibility: Interested witness? Related? Contradictions?
**Circumstantial Evidence**:
- No direct evidence, only circumstances (motive, opportunity, recovery)
- Apply Panchsheel Principles (Sharad Sarda case):
1. Circumstances fully established?
2. Consistent only with guilt?
3. Conclusive nature?
4. Exclude every hypothesis except guilt?
5. Chain complete (no missing link)?
- If any principle fails → Weak circumstantial case
**Corroboration**:
- Single witness enough? OR corroboration needed?
- Dying declaration: Can be sole basis if truthful (Laxman case)
- Sexual assault: Victim testimony sufficient; no corroboration required
4. **Chain of Custody** (Physical Evidence):
- Seizure → Sealing → FSL → Court production
- Any break in chain → Evidence may be unreliable
Output: Evidence inventory with admissibility status and strength rating
Phase 4: Burden of Proof Analysis
Objective: Determine who must prove what and to what standard
Process (Use IL-CRIM-BURDEN-PROOF.md):
1. **General Rule**:
- **Burden on PROSECUTION** to prove guilt
- **Standard**: BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT (very high standard)
2. **What Prosecution Must Prove**:
- All essential ingredients of offence
- Actus reus (physical act committed)
- Mens rea (intention/knowledge/negligence)
- Identity of accused
- No general exception applies
3. **Burden on Accused** (Section 105):
- **If accused claims general exception** (self-defense, insanity, mistake, etc.)
- **Standard**: PREPONDERANCE OF PROBABILITIES (balance of probabilities - lower than beyond reasonable doubt)
- Accused need NOT prove beyond reasonable doubt, only show "more likely than not"
4. **Presumptions** (Sections 113A, 113B, 114):
**Section 113A: Abetment of Suicide by Married Woman**:
- If married woman commits suicide within 7 years + husband/relatives subjected her to cruelty
- **Presumption**: Husband/relatives abetted suicide
- **Effect**: Reverse burden on accused
**Section 113B: Dowry Death**:
- If woman dies within 7 years of marriage + cruelty/harassment for dowry proved
- **Presumption**: Husband/relatives caused dowry death
- **Effect**: Reverse burden on accused
5. **Practical Application**:
**Example: Murder with Self-Defense Claim**:
- Prosecution must prove:
1. Accused caused death (beyond reasonable doubt)
2. With intention to cause death (beyond reasonable doubt)
- Accused must prove:
1. Self-defense (preponderance of probabilities)
2. Imminent threat, no retreat, proportionate force
**Example: Dowry Death**:
- Prosecution must prove:
1. Woman died within 7 years of marriage
2. Cruelty/harassment for dowry occurred soon before death
- Then presumption arises under Section 113B
- Accused must rebut presumption (prove innocence)
Output: Burden allocation matrix showing who proves what and to what standard
Phase 5: Strategy Development
Objective: Develop prosecution or defense strategy
A. PROSECUTION STRATEGY
If perspective is Prosecution:
1. **Case Strengths**: - List strongest evidence - Direct evidence available? - Credible witnesses? - Forensic evidence (DNA, fingerprints)? 2. **Case Weaknesses**: - Identify gaps - Missing evidence? - Witness credibility issues? - Circumstantial evidence chain incomplete? 3. **Evidence Collection Priority**: - What additional evidence needed? - Witnesses not yet examined? - Forensic tests pending? - Section 65B certificates obtained? 4. **Anticipated Defenses**: - What will defense argue? - Self-defense claim likely? - Alibi expected? - Exception under IPC/BNS? 5. **Prosecution Strategy**: - How to prove each ingredient? - Witness examination order - Documentary evidence production plan - Cross-examination preparation - Closing argument themes
B. DEFENSE STRATEGY
If perspective is Defense:
1. **Prosecution Weaknesses**: - Where is prosecution case weak? - Unreliable witnesses? - Evidence inadmissible? - Ingredients not proved? 2. **Defense Options**: **Option A: Challenge Prosecution Case**: - Show reasonable doubt - Highlight contradictions - Challenge admissibility - Cross-examination strategy - NO burden on defense to prove innocence **Option B: Affirmative Defense (Exception)**: - Claim general exception (self-defense, insanity, etc.) - Read IL-CRIM-GENERAL-EXCEPTIONS.md - Gather evidence to prove exception - Remember: Burden on accused (Section 105) - Standard: Preponderance (easier than beyond reasonable doubt) **Option C: Alibi**: - Accused was elsewhere when offence occurred - Alibi witnesses - Documentary proof (bills, tickets, CCTV) 3. **Cross-Examination Strategy**: - Identify prosecution witnesses to discredit - Prepare leading questions - Confront with prior inconsistent statements (Section 161) - Show bias/interest 4. **Section 313 Preparation**: - Anticipate incriminating circumstances to be put - Prepare coherent explanations - Right to remain silent vs duty to explain 5. **Defense Evidence**: - Defense witnesses needed? - Should accused testify? (Pros and cons) - Expert evidence to rebut prosecution experts?
Output: Comprehensive strategy document with action items
Phase 6: Risk Assessment
Objective: Identify risks and mitigation strategies
Process:
1. **Legal Risks**: - What is worst-case outcome? - Maximum sentence for offences charged? - Likelihood of conviction based on evidence? 2. **Procedural Risks**: - Delay in trial? - Witness turning hostile? - Evidence degradation (physical evidence)? 3. **Strategic Risks**: - For Defense: Alibi breaks down under cross-examination? - For Prosecution: Key witness credibility destroyed? 4. **Mitigation Strategies**: - How to reduce risks? - Backup witnesses? - Alternative defenses? - Plea bargaining options? (Section 265A-265L CrPC / 290-305 BNSS)
Output: Risk matrix with mitigation plan
Output Format
# CRIMINAL CASE ANALYSIS REPORT ## CASE SUMMARY [One-paragraph overview] ## FACT ANALYSIS ### Timeline | Date/Time | Event | Actors Involved | |-----------|-------|-----------------| | [Date] | [Event description] | [Actors] | ### Key Facts - **Victim**: [Details] - **Accused**: [Details] - **Actus Reus**: [Physical act] - **Mens Rea**: [Mental state] - **Motive**: [If established] ## OFFENCE ANALYSIS ### Applicable Law - Offence Date: [Date] - Applicable Statute: [IPC 1860 / BNS 2023] ### Offences Identified #### Primary Offence: [Offence Name] **Statutory Provision**: [IPC/BNS Section] **Punishment**: [Imprisonment + Fine details] **Essential Ingredients**: 1. [Ingredient 1] - Status: Established / Not Established / Uncertain - Evidence: [Supporting evidence] 2. [Ingredient 2] - Status: [As above] - Evidence: [As above] #### Related Offences - [Offence 2]: [Section] - [Offence 3]: [Section] ## EVIDENCE EVALUATION ### Evidence Inventory | Evidence Type | Description | Admissible? | Strength | Notes | |---------------|-------------|-------------|----------|-------| | Oral | Eyewitness X | Yes | Strong | Credible, no contradictions | | Documentary | Medical report | Yes | Strong | Corroborates injury | | Electronic | WhatsApp msgs | No | N/A | No Section 65B certificate | | Physical | Murder weapon | Yes | Medium | Chain of custody gap | ### Circumstantial Evidence Analysis [If applicable, apply Panchsheel Principles] ## BURDEN OF PROOF ### On Prosecution (Beyond Reasonable Doubt) - [Element 1 to prove] - [Element 2 to prove] ### On Accused (Preponderance of Probabilities) - [If exception claimed: Element to prove] ### Presumptions Applicable - [Section 113A / 113B / etc. if applicable] ## STRATEGY RECOMMENDATIONS ### [For Prosecution / For Defense] **Strengths**: - [Strength 1] - [Strength 2] **Weaknesses**: - [Weakness 1] - [Weakness 2] **Recommended Approach**: [Detailed strategy] **Action Items**: 1. [Action 1 with timeline] 2. [Action 2 with timeline] ## RISK ASSESSMENT | Risk | Likelihood | Impact | Mitigation | |------|------------|--------|------------| | [Risk 1] | High/Medium/Low | High/Medium/Low | [Strategy] | ## NEXT STEPS 1. **Immediate** (0-7 days): [Actions] 2. **Short-term** (1-4 weeks): [Actions] 3. **Long-term** (1-3 months): [Actions] ## PROTOCOL REFERENCES - [Protocol 1] - [Protocol 2]
Skill Limitations
- •Protocol-Dependent: Analysis quality depends on reading relevant protocols
- •Fact-Dependent: Accuracy depends on completeness of facts provided
- •Not Legal Advice: This is analytical tool, not substitute for licensed counsel
- •India-Specific: Applies only to Indian criminal law
- •Current as of January 2025: Laws may change
Integration with Agents
This skill is used by:
- •criminal-law-specialist agent: For comprehensive case analysis
- •criminal-procedure-expert agent: For procedural strategy
- •evidence-analyst agent: For evidence evaluation component
Can be invoked via:
- •
/criminal-law-advicecommand - •Direct agent consultation
End of Skill: criminal_case_analyzer