#Fact Check: Viral Footage from Bangladesh Incorrectly Portrayed as Immigrant March for Violence in Assam.

Introduction

The CID of Jharkhand Police has uncovered a network of around 8000 bank accounts engaged in cyber fraud across the state, with a focus on Deoghar district, revealing a surprising 25% concentration of fraudulent accounts. In a recent meeting with bank officials, the CID shared compiled data, with 20% of the identified accounts traced to State Bank of India branches. This revelation, surpassing even Jamtara's cyber fraud reputation, prompts questions about the extent of cybercrime in Jharkhand. Under Director General Anurag Gupta's leadership, the CID has registered 90 cases, apprehended 468 individuals, and seized 1635 SIM cards and 1107 mobile phones through the Prakharna portal to combat cybercrime. 

This shocking revelation by, Jharkhand Police's Criminal Investigation Department (CID) has built a comprehensive database comprising information on about 8000 bank accounts tied to cyber fraud operations in the state. This vital information has aided in the launch of investigations to identify the account holders implicated in these illegal actions. Furthermore, the CID shared this information with bank officials at a meeting on January 12 to speed up the identification process.

Background of the Investigation

The CID shared the collated material with bank officials in a meeting on 12 January 2024 to expedite the identification process. A stunning 2000 of the 8000 bank accounts under investigation are in the Deoghar district alone, with 20 per cent of these accounts connected to various State Bank of India branches. The discovery of 8000 bank accounts related to cybercrime in Jharkhand is shocking and disturbing. Surprisingly, Deoghar district has exceeded even Jamtara, which was famous for cybercrime, accounting for around 25% of the discovered bogus accounts in the state.

As per the information provided by the CID Crime Branch, it has been found that most of the accounts were opened in banks, are currently under investigation and around 2000 have been blocked by the investigating agencies.

Recovery Process

During the investigation, it was found out that most of these accounts were running on rent, the cyber criminals opened them by taking fake phone numbers along with Aadhar cards and identity cards from people in return these people(account holders) will get a fixed amount every month. 

The CID has been unrelenting in its pursuit of cybercriminals. Police have recorded 90 cases and captured 468 people involved in cyber fraud using the Prakharna site. 1635 SIM Cards and 1107 mobile phones were confiscated by police officials during raids in various cities.

The Crime Branch has revealed the names of the cities where accounts are opened

1. Deoghar 2500
2. Dhanbad 1183
3. Ranchi 959
4. Bokaro 716
5. Giridih 707
6. Jamshedpur 584
7. Hazaribagh 526
8. Dumka 475
9. Jamtara 443

Impact on the Financial Institutions and Individuals

These cyber scams significantly influence financial organisations and individuals; let us investigate the implications.

• Victims: Cybercrime victims have significant financial setbacks, which can lead to long-term financial insecurity. In addition, people frequently suffer mental pain as a result of the breach of personal information, which causes worry, fear, and a lack of faith in the digital financial system. One of the most difficult problems for victims is the recovery process, which includes retrieving lost cash and repairing the harm caused by the cyberattack. Individuals will find this approach time-consuming and difficult, in a lot of cases people are unaware of where and when to approach and seek help. Hence, awareness about cybercrimes and a reporting mechanism are necessary to guide victims through the recovery process, aiding them in retrieving lost assets and repairing the harm inflicted by cyberattacks.

• Financial Institutions: Financial institutions face direct consequences when they incur significant losses due to cyber financial fraud. Unauthorised account access, fraudulent transactions, and the compromise of client data result in immediate cash losses and costs associated with investigating and mitigating the breach's impact. Such assaults degrade the reputation of financial organisations, undermine trust, erode customer confidence, and result in the loss of potential clients. 

• Future Implications and Solutions: Recently, the CID discovered a sophisticated cyber fraud network in Jharkhand. As a result, it is critical to assess the possible long-term repercussions of such discoveries and propose proactive ways to improve cybersecurity. The CID's findings are expected to increase awareness of the ongoing threat of cyber fraud to both people and organisations. Given the current state of cyber dangers, it is critical to implement rigorous safeguards and impose heavy punishments on cyber offenders. Government organisations and regulatory bodies should also adapt their present cybersecurity strategies to address the problems posed by modern cybercrime.

Solution and Preventive Measures

Several solutions can help combat the growing nature of cybercrime. The first and foremost step is to enhance cybersecurity education at all levels, including:

• Individual Level: To improve cybersecurity for individuals, raising awareness across all age groups is crucial. This can only be done by knowing the potential threats by following the best online practices, following cyber hygiene, and educating people to safeguard themselves against financial frauds such as phishing, smishing etc.
• Multi-Layered Authentication: Encouraging individuals to enable MFA for their online accounts adds an extra layer of security by requiring additional verification beyond passwords. 
• Continuous monitoring and incident Response:  By continuously monitoring their financial transactions and regularly reviewing the online statements and transaction history, ensure that everyday transactions are aligned with your expenditures, and set up the accounts alert for transactions exceeding a specified amount for usual activity.   
• Report Suspicious Activity: If you see any fraudulent transactions or activity, contact your bank or financial institution immediately; they will lead you through investigating and resolving the problem. The victim must supply the necessary paperwork to support your claim.

How to reduce the risks

• Freeze compromised accounts: If you think that some of your accounts have been compromised, call the bank immediately and request that the account be frozen or temporarily suspended, preventing further unauthorised truncations

• Update passwords: Update and change your passwords for all the financial accounts, emails, and online banking accounts regularly, if you suspect any unauthorised access, report it immediately  and always enable MFA that adds an extra layer of protection to your accounts.

Conclusion

The CID's finding of a cyber fraud network in Jharkhand is a stark reminder of the ever-changing nature of cybersecurity threats. Cyber security measures are necessary to prevent such activities and protect individuals and institutions from being targeted against cyber fraud. As the digital ecosystem continues to grow, it is really important to stay vigilant and alert as an individual and society as a whole. We should actively participate in more awareness activities to update and upgrade ourselves.  

References 

• https://avenuemail.in/cid-uncovers-alarming-cyber-fraud-network-8000-bank-accounts-in-jharkhand-involved/
• https://www.the420.in/jharkhand-cid-cyber-fraud-crackdown-8000-bank-accounts-involved/
• https://www.livehindustan.com/jharkhand/story-cyber-fraudsters-in-jharkhand-opened-more-than-8000-bank-accounts-cid-freezes-2000-accounts-investigating-9203292.html

‍

Introduction

Words come easily, but not necessarily the consequences that follow. Imagine a 15-year-old child on the internet hoping that the world will be nice to him and help him gain confidence, but instead, someone chooses to be mean on the internet, or the child becomes the victim of a new kind of cyberbullying, i.e., online trolling. The consequences of trolling can have serious repercussions, including eating disorders, substance abuse, conduct issues, body dysmorphia, negative self-esteem, and, in tragic cases, self-harm and suicide attempts in vulnerable individuals. The effects of online trolling can include anxiety, depression, and social isolation. This is one example, and hate speech and online abuse can touch anyone, regardless of age, background, or status. The damage may take different forms, but its impact is far-reaching. In today’s digital age, hate speech spreads rapidly through online platforms, often amplified by AI algorithms. 

As we celebrate today, i.e., 18th June, the International Day for Countering Hate Speech, if we have ever been mean to someone on the internet, we pledge never to repeat that kind of behaviour, and if we have been the victim, we will stand against the perpetrator and report it. 

This year, the theme for the International Day for Countering Hate Speech is “Hate Speech and Artificial Intelligence Nexus: Building coalitions to reclaim inclusive and secure environments free of hatred. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, in his statement, said, “Today, as this year’s theme reminds us, hate speech travels faster and farther than ever, amplified by Artificial Intelligence. Biased algorithms and digital platforms are spreading toxic content and creating new spaces for harassment and abuse."

Coded Convictions: How AI Reflects and Reinforces Ideologies

Algorithms have swiftly taken the place of feelings; they tamper with your taste, and they do so with a lighter foot, invisibly. They are becoming an important component of social media user interaction and content distribution. While these tools are designed to improve user experience, they frequently inadvertently spread divisive ideologies and push extremist propaganda. This amplification can strengthen the power of extremist organisations, spread misinformation, and deepen societal tensions. This phenomenon, known as “algorithmic radicalisation,” demonstrates how social media companies may utilise a discriminating content selection approach to entice people down ideological rabbit holes and shape their ideas. AI-driven algorithms often prioritise engagement over ethics, enabling divisive and toxic content to trend and placing vulnerable groups, especially youth and minorities, at risk. The UN’s Strategy and Plan of Action on Hate Speech, launched on June 18, 2019, recognises that while AI holds promise for early detection and prevention of harmful speech, it also demands stringent human rights safeguards. Without regulation, these tools can themselves become purveyors of bias and exclusion. 

India’s Constitutional Resolve and Civilizational Ethos against Hate

India has always taken pride in being inclusive and united rather than divided. As far as hate speech is concerned, India's stand is no different. The United Nations, India believes in the same values as its international counterpart. Although India has won many battles against hate speech, the war is not over and is now more prominent than ever due to the advancement in communication technologies. In India, while the right to freedom of speech and expression is protected under Article 19(1)(a), its exercise is limited subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2). Landmark rulings such as Ramji Lal Modi v. State of U.P. and Amish Devgan v. UOI have clarified that speech can be curbed if it incites violence or undermines public order. Section 69A of the IT Act, 2000, empowers the government to block content, and these principles are also reflected in Section 196 of the BNS, 2023 (153A IPC) and Section 299 of the BNS, 2023 (295A IPC). Platforms are also required to track down the creators of harmful content and remove it within a reasonable hour and fulfil their due diligence requirements under IT rules.

While there is no denying that India needs to be well-equipped and prepared normatively to tackle hate propaganda and divisive forces. India’s rich culture and history, rooted in philosophies of Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam (the world is one family) and pluralistic traditions, have long stood as a beacon of tolerance and coexistence. By revisiting these civilizational values, we can resist divisive forces and renew our collective journey toward harmony and peaceful living.

CyberPeace Message

The ultimate goal is to create internet and social media platforms that are better, safer and more harmonious for each individual, irrespective of his/her/their social and cultural background. CyberPeace stands resolute on promoting digital media literacy, cyber resilience, and consistently pushing for greater accountability for social media platforms. 

‍

References

‍

• https://www.un.org/en/observances/countering-hate-speech 
• https://www.artemishospitals.com/blog/the-impact-of-trolling-on-teen-mental-health 
• https://www.orfonline.org/expert-speak/from-clicks-to-chaos-how-social-media-algorithms-amplify-extremism ‍
• https://www.techpolicy.press/indias-courts-must-hold-social-media-platforms-accountable-for-hate-speech/

In a recent ruling, a U.S. federal judge sided with Meta in a copyright lawsuit brought by a group of prominent authors who alleged that their works were illegally used to train Meta’s LLaMA language model. While this seems like a significant legal victory for the tech giant, it may not be so. Rather, this is a good case study for creators in the USA to refine their legal strategies and for policymakers worldwide to act quickly to shape the rules of engagement between AI and intellectual property.

The Case: Meta vs. Authors

In Kadrey v. Meta, the plaintiffs alleged that Meta trained its LLaMA models on pirated copies of their books, violating copyright law. However, U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria ruled that the authors failed to prove two critical things: that their copyrighted works had been used in a way that harmed their market and that such use was not “transformative.” In fact, the judge ruled that converting text into numerical representations to train an AI was sufficiently transformative under the U.S. fair use doctrine. He also noted that the authors’ failure to demonstrate economic harm undermined their claims. Importantly, he clarified that this ruling does not mean that all AI training data usage is lawful, only that the plaintiffs didn’t make a strong enough case.

Meta even admitted that some data was sourced from pirate sites like LibGen, but the Judge still found that fair use could apply because the usage was transformative and non-exploitative.

A Tenuous Win

Chhabria’s decision emphasised that this is not a blanket endorsement of using copyrighted content in AI training. The judgment leaned heavily on the procedural weakness of the case and not necessarily on the inherent legality of Meta’s practices.

Policy experts are warning that U.S. courts are currently interpreting AI training as fair use in narrow cases, but the rulings may not set the strongest judicial precedent. The application of law could change with clearer evidence of commercial harm or a more direct use of content. 

Moreover, the ruling does not address whether authors or publishers should have the right to opt out of AI model training, a concern that is gaining momentum globally.

Implications for India

The case highlights a glaring gap in India’s copyright regime: it is outdated. Since most AI companies are located in the U.S., courts have had the opportunity to examine copyright in the context of AI-generated content. India has yet to start. Recently, news agency ANI filed a case alleging copyright infringement against OpenAI for training on its copyrighted material. However, the case is only at an interim stage. The final outcome of the case will have a significant impact on the legality of these language models being able to use copyrighted material for training.

Considering that India aims to develop “state-of-the-art foundational AI models trained on Indian datasets” under the IndiaAI Mission, the lack of clear legal guidance on what constitutes fair dealing when using copyrighted material for AI training is a significant gap.  

Thus, key points of consideration for policymakers include: 

• Need for Fair Dealing Clarity: India’s fair-dealing provisions under the Copyright Act, 1957, are narrower than U.S. fair use. The doctrine may have to be reviewed to strike a balance between this law and the requirement of diverse datasets to develop foundational models rooted in Indian contexts. A parallel concern regarding data privacy also arises. 
• Push for Opt-Out or Licensing Mechanisms: India should consider whether to introduce a framework that requires companies to license training data or provide an opt-out system for creators, especially given the volume of Indian content being scraped by global AI systems.
• Digital Public Infrastructure for AI: India’s policymakers could take this opportunity to invest in public datasets, especially in regional languages, that are both high quality and legally safe for AI training.
• Protecting Local Creators: India needs to ensure that its authors, filmmakers, educators and journalists are protected from having their work repurposed without compensation, since power asymmetries between Big Tech and local creators can lead to exploitation of the latter.

Conclusion

The ruling in Meta’s favour is just one win for the developer. The real questions about consent, compensation and creative control remain unanswered. Meanwhile, the lesson for India is urgent: it needs AI policies that balance innovation with creator rights and provide legal certainty and ethical safeguards as it accelerates its AI ecosystem. Further, as global tech firms race ahead, India must not remain a passive data source; it must set the terms of its digital future. This will help the country move a step closer to achieving its goal of building sovereign AI capacity and becoming a hub for digital innovation.

References

• https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jun/26/meta-wins-ai-copyright-lawsuit-as-us-judge-rules-against-authors 
• https://www.wired.com/story/meta-scores-victory-ai-copyright-case/ 
• https://www.cnbc.com/2025/06/25/meta-llama-ai-copyright-ruling.html 
• https://www.mondaq.com/india/copyright/1348352/what-is-fair-use-of-copyright-doctrine 
• https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2113095#:~:text=One%20of%20the%20key%20pillars,models%20trained%20on%20Indian%20datasets. ‍
• https://www.ndtvprofit.com/law-and-policy/ani-vs-openai-delhi-high-court-seeks-responses-on-copyright-infringement-charges-against-chatgpt