How Public Prosecutors Build Cases Against Perpetrators of Violence

rasika773
Dec 9, 2025
7 min read

“Hello there! I’m here to provide you with a bit of information on Strategies and Methods Used by Public Prosecutors in Violence-Related Cases. I would like to remind you that suggestions on this post should not be taken as medical advice, legal advice, therapy, etc. or as a one-size-fits-all approach. Keep in mind that every individual’s journey of experiencing and navigating through stress or trauma is distinctive because you are one of a kind and no person is truly like you! Experiencing abuse in any form is NOT OKAY, but what you are experiencing as a result of abuse is valid. Please know that healing is not a formula and is not for anyone else to define for you. You do you, and you follow all that you need to follow, to help yourself. If you need additional resources or just someone to talk to, feel free to reach out to Imaara Foundation."

Written by: Samyuktha Sairam

Public prosecutors are a cornerstone of any criminal justice system. They play a central role in ensuring that criminal behaviour is effectively addressed through the courts, and they safeguard both public security and the rights of all parties involved in a criminal case. Prosecutors represent the interests of the State, pursue accountability for offenders, and uphold the rights of survivors of crime. In doing so, they must strike a careful balance between their duty as ministers of justice, ensuring fairness, due process, and ethical conduct, and their duty as representatives of the State, committed to advancing public safety through effective litigation.

What are the Core Functions of Prosecutors?

The functions of prosecution services can broadly be divided into two categories: investigative and forensic.

1. Investigative Functions

Investigative functions involve activities leading up to the trial, such as:

Identifying suspects and evaluating the sufficiency of evidence
Advising police on legal strategy, including charges to be filed
Obtaining arrest and search warrants
Reviewing case materials before deciding whether to proceed with prosecution

Though prosecutors may not directly conduct investigations, they exercise significant influence over investigative direction, ensuring that procedures comply with the law and that evidence is collected in a reliable and admissible manner.

2. Forensic (Trial-Related) Functions

Forensic functions concern the prosecutor’s responsibilities within the courtroom, including:

Presenting evidence before the court
Examining and cross-examining witnesses
Arguing for conviction based strictly on the evidence available
Ensuring that inappropriate, unreliable, or illegally obtained evidence is not relied upon
Withdrawing from a case when the evidence suggests that continuing prosecution would be unjust

This stage underscores the dual nature of the prosecutor’s role: to seek justice rather than merely secure convictions. Prosecutors shoulder the burden of proof and must conduct litigation with integrity, fairness, and respect for due process.

Their work in this phase can be divided into three stages:

Case preparation – reviewing evidence, formulating strategy, briefing witnesses
Court representation – conducting the trial, presenting arguments, responding to defence submissions
Appellate advocacy – representing the state when decisions are challenged in higher courts

(Kiener, 2020)

What are the Challenges in the Indian Context?

The functioning of public prosecutors in India is shaped by a range of structural, administrative, and resource-related challenges. The 277th Law Commission Report highlights several constraints that impact prosecution services, including:

1. Heavy Caseloads

Indian prosecutors frequently manage overwhelming caseloads due to:

High crime rates relative to staffing capacity
Persistent shortages of trained personnel
Severe backlogs in courts

This affects their ability to thoroughly prepare cases or coordinate effectively with investigative agencies.

2. Infrastructural Limitations

Resource constraints hinder efficiency, such as:

Inadequate administrative support
Limited access to technology
Insufficient training or professional development opportunities
Poor inter-agency communication systems

These issues often result in delays, inefficiencies, and inconsistent prosecution outcomes.

3. Structural and Legislative Issues

Several structural problems further complicate their work:

A cumbersome and highly bureaucratic appointment and promotion process
Lack of independence in certain states, where prosecutors may be overly dependent on the executive branch
Outdated criminal laws and procedural frameworks, many dating back to the colonial era
Inefficient coordination between police, prosecutors, courts, and witnesses

The combination of these factors, along with a massive case backlog and shortage of legal manpower, makes comprehensive reform challenging despite repeated recommendations for modernization.

(TLI, 2023)

What does Case Preparation in GBV involve, i.e. Evidence Collection and the Investigative Stage?

Gender-based violence (GBV) is often deeply rooted in cultural and social norms. In many societies, harmful beliefs about gender, power, and hierarchy create environments in which violence becomes normalised or even socially sanctioned. These norms not only shape community behaviour but can also influence institutions, including the legal system, making the prosecution of GBV cases particularly challenging. For instance, in some cultural contexts, exerting violence is perceived as a means of maintaining dominance within familial or social hierarchies. As a result, GBV may manifest at multiple levels—within families, communities, and even through state-perpetrated acts—taking the form of physical, psychological, or economic abuse.

What is the Role of Prosecutors During Case Preparation?

During the case preparation stage, prosecutors must ensure that all reasonable investigative steps have been undertaken before moving forward with prosecution. GBV cases require especially careful handling for several reasons:

Avoiding Over-Reliance on Survivor TestimonySurvivor testimony is often central to GBV cases, but excessive reliance on it can put survivors at risk. Testifying may expose them to retaliation from perpetrators or their networks. This does not imply that survivor accounts are unreliable; rather, it is a protective measure that acknowledges the power dynamics and safety concerns unique to GBV.
Ensuring a Comprehensive Police InvestigationProsecutors have the responsibility to verify that investigating officers have conducted a thorough, trauma-informed investigation. This includes ensuring that evidence has been collected promptly and appropriately, and that the survivor has been treated with dignity and sensitivity throughout the process.

What are the Key Types of Evidence in GBV Cases?

A strong GBV case typically relies on a combination of physical, documentary, and testimonial evidence. Important examples include:

Emergency Call Recordings: Emergency call tapes are especially relevant. Survivors may produce excited utterances—spontaneous statements made in response to a traumatic or startling event—which can be admissible even when the hearsay rule would normally exclude such statements. These utterances can be crucial in establishing immediacy, distress, and lack of fabrication.
Photographic Evidence: Photographs of injuries, damaged property, or the crime scene help document the physical impact and context of the abuse.
Physical Evidence: Items such as torn clothing, broken belongings, smeared makeup, or other material traces can corroborate accounts of violence.
Medical Evidence: Medical examination reports documenting injuries, psychological trauma, or forensic samples provide objective support that strengthens prosecutorial arguments.

Together, these forms of evidence reduce the risk placed on survivors, lessen dependence solely on survivor testimony, and help construct a robust, multi-layered case rooted in credible and corroborative proof (UNODC, 2014; ICCT, 2024).

How Do Prosecutors Build a Case at the Forensic Stage?

At the forensic stage, prosecutors move from gathering information to presenting a legally sound and evidence-based case before the court. This stage involves analysing the evidence collected, determining the appropriate charges, and preparing arguments that uphold both due process and the safety and dignity of the survivor.

Prosecutors are responsible for evaluating the nature and number of offences committed, ensuring that all relevant aspects of the incident—including those that may not be immediately visible—are recognised under the law. GBV rarely occurs as a single or isolated event; it is often part of a larger pattern involving coercion, intimidation, threats, or repeated harm. Because of this, prosecutors must examine not only the immediate incident but also any historical patterns that the evidence reveals.

In assessing charges, prosecutors look at the full context of the survivor’s experience, including physical harm, psychological impact, financial control, or other forms of abuse. Their assessment must ensure that the charges accurately reflect the severity and complexity of the case.

Given the seriousness of gender-based violence and its potential to escalate, it is uncommon for prosecutors to decline a GBV case. Prosecuting such offences not only holds perpetrators accountable but also plays an important role in preventing repeat harm and promoting the safety of survivors and the wider community (UNODC, 2014; ICCT, 2024).

Can a Prosecutor Turn a Case Down?

Yes, a prosecutor can decide not to move forward with a case, a process often referred to as diversion or declining to prosecute. While this can occur in GBV cases, it is generally discouraged because of the serious and often escalating nature of such offences.

Importantly, decisions to decline a GBV case are not always about a lack of evidence but are frequently linked to a single but crucial factor: the survivor’s inability or unwillingness to participate in the proceedings.

Prosecutors commonly cite survivor testimony or non-cooperation as the main reasons for declining GBV cases. This highlights the significant emotional pressure placed on survivors, who may already be facing trauma, fear of retaliation, family pressure, or social stigma. When survivors feel overwhelmed or unsupported, participation can become difficult, and this may impact the prosecutor’s ability to move the case forward.

For this reason, it is essential that prosecutors adopt a trauma-informed, survivor-centred approach during all interactions. This includes:

Creating a comfortable and enabling environment during interviews.
Using a calm, respectful tone and avoiding any behaviour that may feel accusatory or dismissive.
Avoiding unnecessary scrutiny of the survivor’s testimony, which can heighten anxiety or self-doubt.
Showing empathy and genuine interest, despite heavy caseloads or time constraints.
Allowing survivors to ask questions freely, and responding in clear, simple, non-technical language.
Being patient and flexible, understanding that trauma may affect memory, communication, and emotional responses.

A survivor should always feel that their safety, dignity, and well-being are prioritised throughout the process. The prosecutor’s responsibility is not only to pursue justice but also to ensure that participation in the legal process does not cause further harm (UNODC, 2014).

Want the references for this article?