#FactCheck - AI-Generated Clip of Lion Carrying Woman Shared as Real Incident

Introduction

On March 12, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) proposed the Bill to curb anti-competitive practices of tech giants through ex-ante regulation. The Draft Digital Competition Bill is to apply to ‘Core Digital Services,’ with the Central Government having the authority to update the list periodically. The proposed list in the Bill encompasses online search engines, online social networking services, video-sharing platforms, interpersonal communications services, operating systems, web browsers, cloud services, advertising services, and online intermediation services. 

The primary highlight of the Digital Competition Law Report created by the Committee on Digital Competition Law presented to the Parliament in the 2nd week of March 2024 involves a recommendation to introduce new legislation called the ‘Digital Competition Act,’ intended to strike a balance between certainty and flexibility. The report identified ten anti-competitive practices relevant to digital enterprises in India. These are anti-steering, platform neutrality/self-preferencing, bundling and tying, data usage (use of non-public data), pricing/ deep discounting, exclusive tie-ups, search and ranking preferencing, restricting third-party applications and finally advertising Policies.

Key Take-Aways: Digital Competition Bill, 2024

1. Qualitative and quantitative criteria for identifying Systematically Significant Digital Enterprises, if it meets any of the specified thresholds. 

• Financial thresholds in each of the immediately preceding three financial years like turnover in India, global turnover, gross merchandise value in India, or global market capitalization.
• User thresholds in each of the immediately preceding 3 financial years in India like the core digital service provided by the enterprise has at least 1 crore end users, or it has at least 10,000 business users.
• The Commission may make the designation based on other factors such as the size and resources of an enterprise, number of business or end users, market structure and size, scale and scope of activities of an enterprise and any other relevant factor.

2. A period of 90 days is provided to notify the CCI of qualification as an SSDE. Additionally, the enterprise must also notify the Commission of other enterprises within the group that are directly or indirectly involved in the provision of Core Digital Services, as Associate Digital Enterprises (ADE) and the qualification shall be for 3 years.
3. It prescribes obligations for SSDEs and their ADEs upon designation. The enterprise must comply with certain obligations regarding Core Digital Services, and non-compliance with the same shall result in penalties. Enterprises must not directly or indirectly prevent or restrict business users or end users from raising any issue of non-compliance with the enterprise’s obligations under the Act. 
4. Avoidance of favouritism in product offerings by SSDE,  its related parties, or third parties for the manufacture and sale of products or provision of services over those offered by third-party business users on the Core Digital Service in any manner.
5. The Commission will be having the same powers as vested to a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 when trying a suit.
6. Penalty for non-compliance without reasonable cause may extend to Rs 1 lakh for each day during which such non-compliance occurs (max. of Rs 10 crore). It may extend to 3 years or with a fine, which may extend to Rs 25 crore or with both. The Commission may also pass an order imposing a penalty on an enterprise (not exceeding 1% of the global turnover) in case it provides incorrect, incomplete, misleading information or fails to provide information. 

Suggestions and Recommendations

• The ex-ante model of regulation needs to be examined for the Indian scenario and studies need to be conducted on it has worked previously in different jurisdictions like the EU. 
• The Bill should be aimed at prioritising the fostering of fair competition by preventing monopolistic practices in digital markets exclusively. A clear distinction from the already existing Competition Act, 2002 in its functioning needs to be created so that there is no overlap in the regulations and double jeopardy is not created for enterprises.
• Restrictions on tying and bundling and data usage have been shown to negatively impact MSMEs that rely significantly on big tech to reduce operational costs and enhance customer outreach.
• Clear definitions of "dominant position" and "anti-competitive behaviour" are essential for effective enforcement in terms of digital competition need to be defined. 
• Encouraging innovation while safeguarding consumer data privacy in consonance with the DPDP Act should be the aim. Promoting interoperability and transparency in algorithms can prevent discriminatory practices. 
• Regular reviews and stakeholder consultations will ensure the law adapts to rapidly evolving technologies. 
• Collaboration with global antitrust bodies which is aimed at enhancing cross-border regulatory coherence and effectiveness.

Conclusion

The need for a competition law that is focused exclusively on Digital Enterprises is the need of the hour and hence the Committee recommended enacting the Digital Competition Act to enable CCI to selectively regulate large digital enterprises. The proposed legislation should be restricted to regulate only those enterprises that have a significant presence and ability to influence the Indian digital market. The impact of the law needs to be restrictive to digital enterprises and it should not encroach upon matters not influenced by the digital arena. India's proposed Digital Competition Bill aims to promote competition and fairness in the digital market by addressing anti-competitive practices and dominant position abuses prevalent in the digital business space. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs has received 41-page public feedback on the draft which is expected to be tabled next year in front of the Parliament. 

References

1. https://www.medianama.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/DRAFT-DIGITAL-COMPETITION-BILL-2024.pdf
2. https://prsindia.org/files/policy/policy_committee_reports/Report_Summary-Digital_Competition_Law.pdf
3. https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/startups/meity-meets-india-inc-to-hear-out-digital-competition-law-concerns/articleshow/111091837.cms?from=mdr
4. https://www.mca.gov.in/bin/dms/getdocument?mds=gzGtvSkE3zIVhAuBe2pbow%253D%253D&type=open
5. https://www.barandbench.com/law-firms/view-point/digital-competition-laws-beginning-of-a-new-era
6. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/policy-explainer-digital-competition-bill-nimisha-srivastava-lhltc/
7. https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=5722a078-1839-4ece-aec9-49336ff53b6c

‍

Introduction

Attacks by cybercriminals targeting national critical infrastructure are increasing at an unsettling rate. Such attacks have the potential to do severe damage by upsetting transportation networks, utilities, financial services, and other vital infrastructure. The physical and digital systems that underpin a nation's economy are known as critical infrastructure thus if they were to be disrupted, there would be serious risks to the economy and public health and safety. Establishing proper cybersecurity measures and protecting those digital systems from possible threats or cyberattacks is necessary. Both public and private sector assets are included in these essential infrastructure categories.

Nationwide alert:

Recently one of the biggest hacker organizations has warned of an upcoming cyberattack on the critical infrastructure and websites in India, causing a countrywide alert. A gang of hackers from Indonesia and Pakistan, celebrating 4,000 members, announced a planned “Cyber Party” on 11 December 2023. The event’s claimed goal is to compromise and disrupt India's digital infrastructure. They disclosed this information on their Telegram channel.

This hacker organization holds a record of launching extensive cyberattacks; in the past, it sent out a "red notice" that was intended to target 12,000 websites run by the Indian government. They have previously attacked other nations, such as Israel, Sweden, and the United States. Their reasons are varied and might include anything from assaults on certain groups to religious disagreements.

The gang has also been acclaimed for hacking into a New York City police agency, obtaining health and social media data from Israel, and exposing information from Swedish social media users. These alarming events show how urgently strong and all-encompassing cybersecurity measures are needed, not only in India but throughout the world.

Effect(s) on India

1.  Central Agencies Are Alert, Expect Health Sector Attacks: The cyberinfrastructure of the health sector has been a common target of assaults, particularly in the aftermath of the COVID-19 epidemic, which has authorities particularly concerned. Relevant ministries have received notifications from central authorities advising them to take precautions against unwanted access. The security of digital infrastructure is seriously challenged by the constantly changing panorama of cyber-attacks, according to those who are aware of the warning and threat.

2. National security concerns: Because of the interconnectedness of critical national infrastructure, a cyberattack may have an impact on national security. Attacks against defense networks, intelligence organizations health infrastructure, or military systems, for instance, might make it more difficult for the nation to respond to threats from outside.

3.    Concerns for Public Safety and Health: Cyberattacks on healthcare systems run the risk of compromising patient data, stopping medical procedures, and even endangering the general public's health. This might have potentially fatal results in urgent circumstances.

4.  Data Breach and Privacy Issues: Stealing confidential data is a common component of cybersecurity assaults. A breach of critical infrastructure systems might result in sensitive data, including personal information, being misused and accessed without authorization, raising privacy issues.

Preventive and protective measures

1.    The plan for responding to incidents: Make sure a clear incident response strategy is in place, with a focus on healthcare systems, and that it is especially designed to handle cyber-attacks on critical infrastructure.

2.  Better Tracking: Observing vital networks, systems, and data flows more closely, especially in the healthcare industry. Using cutting-edge threat detection technologies to spot odd or questionable activity.

3.   Critical System Isolation: Cutting off vital healthcare systems from the wider network to reduce the chance of attackers moving laterally.

4.   Continual Backups: Make sure that backup copies of important data and systems are kept in a safe, isolated location by regularly backing them up. In the event of a ransomware attack or data breach, this makes recovery easier.

5.    Update and patch systems: Make sure that all operating systems and apps utilized in the infrastructure of the healthcare industry are updated with the most recent security updates.

6. Protocols for Communication: In the case of a cyber-incident, establishing explicit communication mechanisms to guarantee that pertinent parties are notified as soon as possible. This covers correspondence with law enforcement, the public, and other members of the healthcare industry as needed.

Conclusion

Urgent preventative actions are essential in response to an impending cyber threat revealed by a large hacker organization that is targeting India's key infrastructure, specifically the healthcare sector. The interconnectedness of this infrastructure puts public safety, privacy, and national security in danger. A crucial defensive approach is formed by the proactive measures mentioned, which include communication protocols, system isolation, improved monitoring, incident response preparation, and frequent backups. The dangers underline the necessity of international collaboration in tackling cybersecurity issues and the requirement for shared responsibility of everyone to safeguard digital networks. To reduce risks and guarantee the resilience of vital national infrastructure in the face of changing cyber threats, authorities must continue to develop and adapt their cybersecurity tactics.

References:

• https://www.cnbctv18.com/technology/exclusive--nationwide-alert-sounded-as-hacker-group-plans-cyber-party-to-attack-indias-critical-digital-infra-18520021.htm
• https://www.the420.in/ndian-authorities-high-alert-hacker-groups-threaten-cyber-assault/
• https://www.cnbctv18.com/technology/exclusive--nationwide-alert-sounded-as-hacker-group-plans-cyber-party-to-attack-indias-critical-digital-infra-18520021.htm#:~:text=By%20News18.com%20Dec%208,%3A58%20AM%20IST%20(Published)&text=A%20nationwide%20alert%20has%20been,Indian%20websites%20and%20critical%20infrastructure
• https://verveindustrial.com/resources/blog/critical-infrastructure-cyber-security/

Executive Summary

‍

A video is being widely circulated on social media by Pakistani users as propaganda against the Indian Army. In the video, a man can be seen being beaten by a group of women in the middle of a road. Based on the viral video, it is being claimed that in Phuket, Thailand, Lieutenant General Rajiv Kiran Sahni, DG EME of the Indian Army, was thrashed by "ladyboys" after he allegedly harassed them and refused to pay the full amount.

Research by the CyberPeace Research Wing  found the viral claim to be misleading and baseless. The viral video has no connection with Lieutenant General Rajiv Kiran Sahni (DG EME) of the Indian Army. According to credible media reports obtained during the research, this incident took place in Pattaya, Thailand, in December 2025, where a dispute over payment allegedly broke out between an Indian tourist named Raj Jasuja and some transgender women (ladyboys). Subsequently, the tourist was assaulted.

‍

Claim:

‍

A Pakistani website shared the viral video claiming that Indian Army Lieutenant General Rajiv Kiran Sahni (DG EME) was publicly thrashed in Phuket, Thailand, by ladyboys after he harassed them and refused to pay the full amount.

‍https://dnd.com.pk/indian-lt-gen-rajiv-kumar-sahni-dg-eme-was-thrashed-publicly-in-phuket-after-he-touched-a-ladyboy-without-permission/329732/

‍

‍

‍

Meanwhile, on the social site X (formerly Twitter), a user shared the viral video and wrote, “Indian Army Lt Gen Rajiv Kiran Sahni, DG EME, thrashed by Thai ladyboys in Phuket after harassing them and refusing to pay full amount. They think they can bully and oppress people everywhere like Christians in Manipur, but Thailand showed them the reality.”

‍

https://x.com/uthmanrumi2025/status/2061554209036898369

‍

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

To investigate the claim made with the viral video, we conducted a reverse search of the video's keyframes. During this process, we found a report by The Times of India. The report, published on January 4, 2026, stated that “According to 'The Thaiger', an Indian tourist was hospitalized in Pattaya, Thailand. It is alleged that a group of transgender women attacked him following a dispute over payment for escort services. The incident occurred on December 27, when rescue workers from the Sawang Boriboon Foundation received a call around 5:30 AM regarding an injured foreign tourist near the beachside entrance of Walking Street. According to the rescue workers who found the victim, he was identified as 52-year-old Indian national Raj Jasuja. Injury marks were clearly visible on his face and the back of his head. He was given first aid before being taken to the hospital for further treatment. A 19-year-old Thai witness, Pongpol Boonchid, told police and rescue workers that the fight began when Raj was seen arguing with a transgender sex worker near the entry gate of Walking Street. The row escalated as both began chasing and hitting each other. According to the witness, the transgender woman then called several of her friends, who arrived and collectively attacked the Indian tourist. It is believed the fight started over money, as the tourist reportedly did not pay the full amount agreed upon for the services. Raj has not made any public statement regarding the incident.”

‍

https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/indian-national-raj-jasuja-thrashed-by-transwomen-in-thailand-after-allegedly-refusing-to-pay-for-escort-service/articleshow/126327519.cms

‍

‍

Furthermore, another report by The Indian Express, published on January 5, 2026, stated regarding the incident: “A group of transgender women allegedly beat up an Indian tourist in Pattaya, Thailand, according to a local media report. The dispute reportedly arose over non-payment of fees for sex services. In a viral video from December 27, three transgender women are seen hitting the 52-year-old man with slippers. The situation worsened when the man refused to pay the requested amount and tried to leave the spot in a car. The transgender women accused the man of not paying. Subsequently, he was allegedly kicked and punched, after which emergency responders intervened. According to a report by 'The Thaiger', the man suffered injuries to his face and the back of his head. He was given first aid on the spot and later taken to Pattamaku Hospital for further treatment. A Thai eyewitness told rescue workers that he saw the man arguing with a transgender sex worker near the entrance of the famous 'Walking Street' area. The witness stated that the argument turned into a physical altercation, with both parties reportedly chasing and hitting each other, after which others joined in, turning it into a group attack. According to the report, the witness further claimed the dispute occurred because the Indian tourist allegedly did not pay the full amount fixed for sexual services. Thai police said they would ask the man to file a formal complaint once he fully recovers.”

‍

https://indianexpress.com/article/trending/trending-globally/indian-man-beaten-by-transgender-women-in-pattaya-viral-video-10455877/

‍

‍

Conclusion:

‍

Our research found the viral claim to be misleading and baseless. The viral video has no connection with Lieutenant General Rajiv Kiran Sahni (DG EME) of the Indian Army. According to credible media reports, the incident occurred in Pattaya, Thailand, where in December 2025, an Indian tourist named Raj Jasuja had a dispute over payment with some transgender women (ladyboys), leading to the assault.

‍