Argus reads call records, internet records, device exports, bank statements and the first information report itself onto one timeline, one map and one network — so the correlation that solves the case is produced automatically instead of by hand. From the first information report to the court report.
The records exist. Reading them together is the bottleneck — and three clocks are running the whole time.
Every provider exports a different column arrangement. The analyst’s first days go on reshaping spreadsheets rather than investigating.
A CDR-only notice on an app-based fraud comes back empty, because the accused never placed a GSM call. A fortnight is lost.
The device sits in one tool, the calls in another, the bank reply in a folder. Joining them is nobody’s assigned task.
of retention on CDR, EDR and IPDR under Indian telecom licence conditions. After that the record is gone — and two years is the outer limit, not a promise.
before defrauded money leaves a layer-one mule account and passes beyond practical recovery.
typically spent turning four operators’ exports into one usable format before analysis can begin at all.
Nine kinds of evidence, parsed and hashed on arrival, placed on one timeline and one map — then read by whichever product the unit runs.
The screen that replaces a fortnight of spreadsheet work: the insight written out in sentences, the anomalies picked out and made clickable, and the movement played back along the timeline.
Every tower touched and the route between them, played back by day, week or whole period at three speeds.
Silence gaps, a contact that becomes frequent, night-tower concentration, handset and SIM changes.
Busiest hour and day, night proportion, probable home and work towers — written out in sentences.
Narrow or highlight by number, place or date once, and it follows the officer across every screen.
Every conclusion is produced from your own records, on your own server. Nothing leaves the building, and the same case gives the same answer every time — which is what a case diary and a court require.
Fourteen to seventeen observations per case, each a specific claim with the evidence behind it and a link through to the record it came from.
Eight prioritised steps in the order they should be taken, each naming the record it needs and what it is expected to prove.
The report in plain language — what happened, who is named, which sections, how much moved and where it went, with numbers attributed to a role.
Ask it the way an officer would say it. Argus prints how it understood the question before it answers, so a misreading is caught in one second.
Pass-through accounts, fan-out and aggregation, same-day layering, the terminal beneficiary, and the two exits — ATM out of state and crypto.
Number matches scored by recurrence, location matches by true distance — so the strongest corroboration is read first.
An operator’s internet record arrives as thousands of destination hosts. Argus resolves them to the applications behind them — which is what makes an IPDR usable in a case where the accused never placed a call.
Forty working screens across the suite, grouped by the part of the investigation they serve.
Findings marked once, anywhere in the case, become numbered paragraphs of a court-ready report — carrying the certificate that Section 63 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam now requires.
A single installation becomes any of them. A district cyber cell takes call-record analysis; a crime branch takes the whole case file. An upgrade is a setting, not a migration.
The tools a force may already own each see one kind of evidence. Cellebrite, Magnet and MSAB pull data off the handset better than anything else — Argus reads their export into the same case as the calls and the money.
| Capability | Argus | Cellebrite Inseyets | Magnet Axiom |
CellHawk Penlink PLX | C-DAC Advik |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Extraction from a seized handset | — | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | — |
| CDR import and tower mapping | ✓ | — | — | ✓ | ✓ |
| Azimuth sector plotting | ✓ | — | — | ✓ | ~ |
| IPDR resolved to applications | ✓ | — | — | ~ | ~ |
| Reads the FIR and builds the case | ✓ | — | — | — | — |
| Device correlated against call records | ✓ | ~ | ~ | ~ | — |
| Money trail and freeze list | ✓ | — | — | — | — |
| Court report with Section 63 | ✓ | ~ | ~ | ~ | ~ |
| Runs offline on a departmental server | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | — | ✓ |
✓ present · ~ partial, or present but not the tool’s strength · — not in this category. Competitor entries reflect published vendor positioning.
That is the whole of a modern investigation — and the only thing Argus was built to do.
Copy the application to a departmental server and open it once. The database builds itself and the unit’s officers are added. No appliance, nothing on any desk.
Take a case already in hand. Drop the FIR in, upload the operator’s records, add the bank reply. The brief, the direction and the correlation follow the same afternoon.
Print the court report and compare it against what the same case produced by hand — in content, in time taken, and in traceability to source.