The increasing use of smart home robots and their growing interaction with humans have raised significant challenges regarding the attribution of criminal liability for harms caused by autonomous intelligent systems and the adequacy of traditional criminal law in addressing such conduct. This study examines whether smart home robots can be recognized as independent perpetrators of crimes or whether criminal liability should be attributed to designers, manufacturers, owners, or operators based on principles of causation, fault-based liability, and breach of legal safety duties.



Using a descriptive-analytical method with a doctrinal and comparative legal approach, the research analyzes the principles of criminal liability under the Islamic Penal Code of Iran, particularly Articles 2, 126, 127, and 140, together with doctrines of causation, negligence, regulatory non-compliance, judicial practice, and comparative legal developments. The analysis covers four principal application domains: childcare, elderly care, education and domestic interaction, and personal data management and privacy.



The findings indicate that harmful conduct by smart home robots—including bodily injury resulting from algorithmic errors, privacy violations, and unauthorized collection or disclosure of personal data—may fall within the scope of existing criminal offenses. However, these systems cannot be regarded as independent criminal offenders because they lack legal personality, conscious will, criminal intent (mens rea), and criminal capacity. Criminal liability therefore remains attributable to designers, manufacturers, owners, or operators whose defective design, manufacturing faults, negligent supervision, misuse, or breach of statutory safety obligations causally contribute to the criminal outcome. The study concludes that increasing AI autonomy weakens the causal link between human conduct and harmful consequences, rendering traditional criminal liability doctrines insufficient and necessitating comprehensive legislation incorporating technology-specific offenses, lifecycle supervision, algorithmic transparency and traceability, and compulsory liability insurance.