#FactCheck - False Claim about Video of Sadhu Lying in Fire at Mahakumbh 2025
Executive Summary:
Recently, our team came across a video on social media that appears to show a saint lying in a fire during the Mahakumbh 2025. The video has been widely viewed and comes with captions claiming that it is part of a ritual during the ongoing Mahakumbh 2025. After thorough research, we found that these claims are false. The video is unrelated to Mahakumbh 2025 and comes from a different context and location. This is an example of how the information posted was from the past and not relevant to the alleged context.
Claim:
A video has gone viral on social media, claiming to show a saint lying in fire during Mahakumbh 2025, suggesting that this act is part of the traditional rituals associated with the ongoing festival. This misleading claim falsely implies that the act is a standard part of the sacred ceremonies held during the Mahakumbh event.
Fact Check:
Upon receiving the post we conducted a reverse image search of the key frames extracted from the video, and traced the video to an old article. Further research revealed that the original post was from 2009, when Ramababu Swamiji, aged 80, laid down on a burning fire for the benefit of society. The video is not recent, as it had already gone viral on social media in November 2009. A closer examination of the scene, crowd, and visuals clearly shows that the video is unrelated to the rituals or context of Mahakumbh 2025. Additionally, our research found that such activities are not part of the Mahakumbh rituals. Reputable sources were also kept into consideration to cross-verify this information, effectively debunking the claim and emphasizing the importance of verifying facts before believing in anything.
For more clarity, the YouTube video attached below further clears the doubt, which reminds us to verify whether such claims are true or not.
Conclusion:
The viral video claiming to depict a saint lying in fire during Mahakumbh 2025 is entirely misleading. Our thorough fact-checking reveals that the video dates back to 2009 and is unrelated to the current event. Such misinformation highlights the importance of verifying content before sharing or believing it. Always rely on credible sources to ensure the accuracy of claims, especially during significant cultural or religious events like Mahakumbh.
- Claim: A viral video claims to show a saint lying in fire during the Mahakumbh 2025.
- Claimed On: X (Formerly Known As Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
Introduction
Misinformation and disinformation are significant issues in today's digital age. The challenge is not limited to any one sector or industry, and has been seen to affect everyone that deals with data of any sort. In recent times, we have seen a rise in misinformation about all manner of subjects, from product and corporate misinformation to manipulated content about regulatory or policy developments.
Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) play an important role in economies, particularly in developing nations, by promoting employment, innovation, and growth. However, in the evolving digital landscape, they also confront tremendous hurdles, such as the dissemination of mis/disinformation which may harm reputations, disrupt businesses, and reduce consumer trust. MSMEs are particularly susceptible since they have minimal resources at their disposal and cannot afford to invest in the kind of talent, technology and training that is needed for a business to be able to protect itself in today’s digital-first ecosystem. Mis/disinformation for MSMEs can arise from internal communications, supply chain partners, social media, competitors, etc. To address these dangers, MSMEs must take proactive steps such as adopting frameworks to counter misinformation and prioritising best practices like digital literacy and training, monitoring and social listening, transparency protocols and robust communication practices.
Assessing the Impact of Misinformation on MSMEs
To assess the impact of misinformation on MSMEs, it is essential to get a full sense of the challenges. To begin with, one must consider the categories of damage which can include financial loss, reputational damage, operational damages, and regulatory noncompliance. Various assessment methodologies can be used to analyze the impact of misinformation, including surveys, interviews, case studies, social media and news data analysis, and risk analysis practices.
Policy Framework and Gaps in Addressing Misinformation
The Digital India Initiative, a flagship program of the Government of India, aims to transform India into a digitally empowered society and knowledge economy. The Information Technology Act, 2000 and the rules made therein govern the technology space and serve as the legal framework for cyber security and data protection. The Bhartiya Nyay Sanhita, 2023 also contains provisions regarding ‘fake news’. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 is a brand new law aimed at protecting personal data. Fact-check units (FCUs) are government and private independent bodies that verify claims about government policies, regulations, announcements, and measures. However, these policy measures are not sector-specific and lack specific guidelines, which have limited impact on their awareness initiatives on misinformation and insufficient support structure for MSMEs to verify information and protect themselves.
Recommendations for Countering Misinformation in the MSME Sector
To counter misinformation for MSMEs, recommendations include creating a dedicated Misinformation Helpline, promoting awareness campaigns, creating regulatory support and guidelines, and collaborating with tech platforms and expert organisations for the identification and curbing of misinformation.
Organisational recommendations include the Information Verification Protocols for the consumers of Information for the verification of critical information before acting upon it, engaging in employee training for regular training on the identification and management of misinformation, creating a crisis management plan to deal with misinformation crisis, form collaboration networks with other MSMEs to share verified information and best practices.
Engage with technological solutions like AI and ML tools for the detection and flagging of potential misinformation along with fact-checking tools and engaging with cyber security measures to prevent misinformation via digital channels.
Conclusion: Developing a Vulnerability Assessment Framework for MSMEs
Creating a vulnerability assessment framework for misinformation in Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in India involves several key components which include the understanding of the sources and types of misinformation, assessing the impact on MSMEs, identifying the current policies and gaps, and providing actionable recommendations. The implementation strategy for policies to counter misinformation in the MSME sector can be by starting with pilot programs in key MSME clusters, and stakeholder engagement by involving industry associations, tech companies and government bodies. Initiating a feedback mechanism for constant improvement of the framework and finally, developing a plan to scale successful initiatives across the country.
References
- https://publications.ut-capitole.fr/id/eprint/48849/1/wp_tse_1516.pdf
- https://techinformed.com/how-misinformation-can-impact-businesses/
- https://pib.gov.in/aboutfactchecke.aspx
Introduction
In an extensive order of 144 pages passed on May 29, 2026, Justice Sachin Datta of the Delhi High Court inter alia affirmed the right of an acquitted or discharged person to reinstate their digital identity. In a batch of more than 30 petitions relating to acquittals, family dispute cases, quashed criminal cases, and parties to proceedings, the petitioners argued that court documents and accusations, having lost their purpose, have kept occupying the search engine, leading to infringement of dignity, privacy, and career and personal life of these individuals. Citing Article 21 of the Indian Constitution as its foundation, the court affirmed that a right to life and personal liberty also includes a right to privacy and to leave behind failed proceedings and adopted wide de-indexing policies, including, where necessary, global de-indexing, thereby ushering in India's "right to be forgotten."
The Constitutional Argument: Article 21 and the Digital Self
The constitutional basis of the right to be forgotten in India rests on the landmark nine-judge bench ruling in Justice K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India. In 2017, the Supreme Court ruled privacy to be a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution and stated informational privacy is a facet of personal liberty. The Supreme Court observed that individuals have an interest in determining how the information concerning them is gathered, disseminated, and accessed.
Building upon this precedent, Justice Sachin Datta held that the right to be forgotten flows naturally from the constitutional guarantee of informational privacy. The judgment represents one of the most significant judicial applications of the Puttaswamy principles, particularly in the context of search engines and online judicial records. Noting the absence of a fully operational statutory framework despite the enactment of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, the court exercised its constitutional jurisdiction to protect individuals from enduring digital harm caused by continued public accessibility of outdated or irrelevant personal information.
INDIAN APPLICATION OF THE GLOBAL PRECEDENT
Tracing back the genesis of this right, it lies in the worldwide jurisdiction on privacy, especially the European Court of Justice's landmark ruling of 2014 in Google Spain SL v. AEPD and Mario Costeja Gonzlez, where it ruled that it is within one's power to ask search engines to de-list links that show personal information that is found to be outdated or irrelevant. This led to a legislated right to erasure by the inclusion of Article 17 in the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), creating the right throughout the EU. India, on the other hand, saw a slow process of evolution when it came to this right. The Madras High Court acknowledged the right to be forgotten partially in 2021 when it directed a petitioner's name to be deleted from an acquittal judgment, which was affirmed by a Division Bench in 2024. Nevertheless, the above were merely judgments confined to the facts of a particular case. However, the decision of the Delhi High Court dated May 2026 proves to be the benchmark in laying down a comprehensive constitutional framework under Article 21 with guiding principles on when a request for de-linking would be entertained and, if warranted, would be extended throughout the world.
Anatomy of the Framework by the Delhi High Court
While Justice Sachin Datta’s ruling recognizes the right to be forgotten, its actual import lies in devising an operative framework. The Court noted that it would maintain judicial records indefinitely in keeping with open justice principles, but an individual's name may not act as a perennial search key with respect to private entities' search engines. Thus, courts will be allowed to de-index judicial records (except their legal reasoning, findings, and ratio decidendi, which will continue to be accessible) from the names appearing therein from search engines and legal databases. While personally identifying data will be obfuscated, the underlying legal reasoning will not be rendered unusable, as access to unredacted records will continue to be available to courts, parties, and authorities. Such orders are also possible to be effective internationally, rendering avoidance difficult. However, the right cannot be absolute, as it is largely unavailable for convicted individuals (particularly if convicted of offenses against women or children or crimes of breach of trust). Courts must pass a proportionality test in considering the balance between privacy and the public right to know. By stating that masking information has an impact on discoverability, not access, it achieves a reconciliation between informational privacy and open justice so that acquitted accused are not held hostage to past accusations forever in the online age.
The Road to Implementation
However, the judgment presents a thick knot of practical issues, the solution to which may take considerable time to untangle. How will petitions for masking orders be filed by those who need them? Will there be a prescribed form? How will legal database systems such as Indian Kanoon and SCC Online operationalize name-based de-indexing while keeping their vast archives usable for lawyers? More significantly, what kind of legal force will global directions for de-indexing hold over those search engines whose main servers lie outside of Indian territory?
This is not to say the judgment isn't important. It simply presents a predictable, almost mundane set of issues that all ambitious pronouncements on constitutional rights face when translated into the world of administration issues that came up even when the EU was first struggling with enforcing the GDPR in 2018. India now has its framework, and the details of its implementation will undoubtedly come through future rounds of litigation, guidelines, and perhaps even legislation.
What remains abundantly clear, though, is the message conveyed by the Delhi High Court that digital permanency is a crime, especially when it causes the most incriminating of a person's legal actions to follow them perpetually, even long after they have been given due process by the system. As Justice Datta eloquently put it, privacy in the digital age is 'not about secrecy but about an individual's control over the dissemination of personal information.' "Now an element of constitutional law in India, the verdict is a declaration that will resonate long beyond the thirty-odd petitions that called it into being.
Conclusion
The ultimate finding of the 2026 right-to-be-forgotten judgment in Delhi High Court reinforces human dignity in the digital era. The Court has acknowledged the need for acquittals and exonerations to have meaningful implications offline, ensuring an individual is not eternally punished through online searches for alleged wrongdoing. Building on the right to privacy established by K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, informational privacy now stands at the core of constitutional guarantees, and India joins the nations establishing precedents to balance openness with dignity.
.webp)
Introduction
YouTube is testing a new feature called ‘Notes,’ which allows users to add community-sourced context to videos. The feature allows users to clarify if a video is a parody or if it is misrepresenting information. The feature builds on existing features to provide helpful content alongside videos. Currently under testing, the feature will be available to a limited number of eligible contributors who will be invited to write notes on videos. These notes will appear publicly under a video if they are found to be broadly helpful. Viewers will be able to rate notes into three categories: ‘Helpful,’ ‘Somewhat helpful,’ or ‘Unhelpful’. Based on the ratings, YouTube will determine which notes are published. The feature will first be rolled out on mobile devices in the U.S. in English. The Google-owned platform will look at ways to improve the feature over time, including whether it makes sense to expand it to other markets.
YouTube To Roll Out The New ‘Notes’ Feature
YouTube is testing an experimental feature that allows users to add notes to provide relevant, timely, and easy-to-understand context for videos. This initiative builds on previous products that display helpful information alongside videos, such as information panels and disclosure requirements when content is altered or synthetic. YouTube in its blog clarified that the pilot will be available on mobiles in the U.S. and in the English language, to start with. During this test phase, viewers, participants, and creators are invited to give feedback on the quality of the notes.
YouTube further stated in its blog that a limited number of eligible contributors will be invited via email or Creator Studio notifications to write notes so that they can test the feature and add value to the system before the organisation decides on next steps and whether or not to expand the feature. Eligibility criteria include having an active YouTube channel in good standing with Yotube’s Community Guidelines.
Viewers in the U.S. will start seeing notes on videos in the coming weeks and months. In this initial pilot, third-party evaluators will rate the helpfulness of notes, which will help train the platform’s systems. As the pilot moves forward, contributors themselves will rate notes as well.
Notes will appear publicly under a video if they are found to be broadly helpful. People will be asked whether they think a note is helpful, somewhat helpful, or unhelpful and the reasons for the same. For example, if a note is marked as ‘Helpful,’ the evaluator will have the opportunity to specify if it is so because it cites high-quality sources or is written clearly and neutrally. A bridging-based algorithm will be used to consider these ratings and determine what notes are published. YouTube is excited to explore new ways to make context-setting even more relevant, dynamic, and unique to the videos we are watching, at scale, across the huge variety of content on YouTube.
CyberPeace Analysis: How Can Notes Help Counter Misinformation
The potential effectiveness of countering misinformation on YouTube using the proposed ‘Notes’ feature is significant. Enabling contributors to include notes on videos can offer relevant and accurate context to clarify any misleading or false information in the video. These notes can aid in enhancing viewers' comprehension of the content and detecting misinformation. The participation from users to rate the added notes as helpful, somewhat helpful, and unhelpful adds a heightened layer of transparency and public participation in identifying the accuracy of the content.
As YouTube intends to gather feedback from its various stakeholders to improve the feature over time, one can look forward to improved policy and practical over time: the feedback mechanism will allow for continuous refinement of the feature, ensuring it effectively addresses misinformation. The platform employs algorithms to identify helpful notes that cater to a broad audience across different perspectives. This helps showcase accurate information and combat misinformation.
Furthermore, along with the Notes feature, YouTube should explore and implement prebunking and debunking strategies on the platform by promoting educational content and empowering users to discern between fact and any misleading information.
Conclusion
The new feature, currently in the testing phase, aims to counter misinformation by providing context, enabling user feedback, leveraging algorithms, promoting transparency, and continuously improving information quality. Considering the diverse audience on the platform and high volumes of daily content consumption, it is important for both the platform operators and users to engage with factual, verifiable information. The fallout of misinformation on such a popular platform can be immense, and so, any mechanism or feature that can help counter the same must be developed to its full potential. Apart from this new Notes feature, YouTube has also implemented certain measures in the past to counter misinformation, such as providing authenticated sources to counter any election misinformation during the recent 2024 elections in India. These efforts are a welcome contribution to our shared responsibility as netizens to create a trustworthy, factual and truly-informational digital ecosystem.
References:
- https://blog.youtube/news-and-events/new-ways-to-offer-viewers-more-context/
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/internet/youtube-tests-feature-that-will-let-users-add-context-to-videos/article68302933.ece
