#FactCheck - Viral Clip Not Harish Rana’s Farewell, Linked to Surat Woman’s Organ Donation

Smart Wearable devices are designed to track several activities in defined parameters and are increasingly becoming a part of everyday life. According to Markets and Markets Report, the global wearable tech market is projected to reach a staggering USD 256.4 billion by 2026. One of the main areas of use of wearable devices is health, including biomedical research, health care, personal health practices and tracking, technology development, and engineering. These wearable devices often include digital health technologies such as consumer smartwatches that monitor an individual's heart rate and step count, and other body-worn sensors like those that continuously monitor blood glucose concentration. 

Wearable devices used by the general population are getting increasingly popular. Health devices like fitness trackers and smartwatches enable continuous monitoring of personal health. Privacy is an emerging concern due to the real-time collection of sensitive data. Vulnerabilities due to unauthorised access or discrimination in case of information being revealed without consent are the primary concerns with these devices. While these concerns are present a lot of related misinformation is emerging due to the same. 

While wearable devices typically come with terms of use that outline how data is collected and used, and there are regulations in place such as EU Law GDPR, such regulations largely govern the regulatory compliances on the handling of personal data, however, the implementation and compliances by the manufacturer is a one another aspect which might present the question on privacy protection. In addition, beyond the challenge of regulatory compliance, the rise of myths and misinformation surrounding wearable tech presents a separate issue. 

Common Misconceptions About Privacy with Wearable Tech

• With the rapid development and growth of wearable technology their use has been subject to countless rumours which fuel misinformation narratives in the minds of general public. Addressing these misconceptions and privacy concerns requires targeted strategies.
• A prevalent misconception is that they are constantly spying on users. While wearable devices collect users’ data in real time, their vulnerability to unauthorised access is similar to that of a non-wearable device.  The issue is of consent when it comes to wearable technology because it gives the ability to record.  If permissions are not asked when a person is being recorded then the data is accessible to external entities.
• There is a common myth that wearable tech is surveillance tool. This is entirely a conjecture. These devices collect the user data with their prior consent and have been created to provide them with real-time information, most commonly physical health information. Since users choose the information shared, the idea of wearable tech serving as a surveillance tool is unfounded.
• Another misconception about wearable tech is that it can diagnose medical conditions. These devices collect real-time health data, such as heart rate or activity levels, they are not designed for medical diagnosis. The data collected may not always be accurate or reliable for clinical use to be interpreted by a healthcare professional. This is mainly because the makers of these devices are not held to the safety and liability standards that medical providers are.
• A prevalent misconception is that wearable tech can cure health issues, which is simply untrue. Wearable tech devices are essentially tracking the health parameters that a user sets. It in no way is a cure for any health issue that one suffers from. A user can manage their health based on the parameters they set on the device such as the number of steps that they walk, check on the heart rate and other metrics for their mental satisfaction but they are not a cure to treat diseases. Wearable tech acts as alerts, notifying users of important health metrics and encouraging proactive health management.

Addressing Privacy and Health Concerns in Wearable Tech

Wearable technology raises concerns for privacy and health due to the colossal amount of personal data collected. To address these, strong data protection measures are essential, ensuring that sensitive health information is securely stored and shared only with consent. Providing users with control over their data is one of the ways to build user trust. It includes enabling them to opt in, access, or delete the data in question. Regulators should establish clear guidelines, ensuring wearables ensure the compliances with data protection regulations like HIPPA, GDPR or DPDP Act, whichever is applicable as per the jurisdiction. Furthermore, global standards for data encryption, device security, and user privacy should be implemented to mitigate risks. Transparency in data usage and consistent updates to software security are also crucial for protecting users' privacy and health while promoting the responsible use of wearable tech.

CyberPeace Insights

• Making informed decisions about wearable tech starts with thorough research. Start by reading reviews and comparing products to assess their features, compatibility, and security standards. 
• Investigate the manufacturer’s reputation for data protection and device longevity. Understanding device capabilities is crucial. One should evaluate whether the wearable meets their needs, such as fitness tracking, health monitoring, or communication features. Consider software security and updates, and data accuracy when comparing options.  Opt for devices that offer two-factor authentication for an additional layer of security.
• Check the permissions requested by the accompanying app; only grant access to data that is necessary for the device's functionality. Always read the terms of use to understand your rights and responsibilities regarding the use of the device. Review and customize data-sharing settings for better control to prevent unauthorised access.
• Staying updated on the tech is equally important. A user should follow the advancements in wearable technology be it regular security updates, or regulatory changes that may affect privacy and usability. This ensures getting tech that aligns with user lifestyle while meeting privacy and security expectations.

Conclusion

Privacy and Misinformation are key concerns that emerge due to the use of wearable tech designed to offer benefits such as health monitoring, fitness tracking, and personal convenience. It requires a combination of informed decision-making by users and stringent regulatory oversight to overcome the issues that emerge due to misinformation about these devices. Users must ensure they understand the capabilities and limitations of their devices, from data accuracy to privacy risks. Additionally, manufacturers and regulators need to prioritise transparency, data protection, and compliance with global standards like GDPR or DPDP to build trust. As wearable tech continues to evolve, a balanced approach to innovation and privacy will be essential in fostering its responsible and beneficial use for all.

References

1. https://thehealthcaretechnologyreport.com/privacy-data-security-concerns-rise-as-healthcare-wearables-gain-popularity/ 
2. https://journals.plos.org/digitalhealth/article?id=10.1371/journal.pdig.0000104
3. https://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Market-Reports/wearable-electronics-market-983.html?gclid=Cj0KCQjwgMqSBhDCARIsAIIVN1V0sqrk6SpYSga3rcDtWcwh8npZ08L0_s4X91gh7yPAa6QmsctB-lMaAlpqEALw_wcB 
4. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/legal-information-management/article/health-data-on-the-go-navigating-privacy-concerns-with-wearable-technologies/05DAF11EFA807051362BB39260C4814C

‍

Executive Summary 

A video circulating on social media claims that Jammu and Kashmir Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Choudhary described Prime Minister Narendra Modi as an agent of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI). In the viral clip, Choudhary is allegedly heard accusing the Prime Minister of pushing Kashmir towards Pakistan and claiming that even pro-India Kashmiris are disillusioned with Modi’s policies.

However, research  by the CyberPeace research wing has found that the video is digitally manipulated. While the visuals are genuine and taken from a real media interaction, the audio has been fabricated and falsely overlaid to misattribute inflammatory remarks to the Deputy Chief Minister.

‍

Claim

‍

An Instagram account named Conflict Watch shared the video on January 20, claiming that J&K Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Choudhary had called Prime Minister Modi an ISI agent. The video purportedly quoted Choudhary as saying that Modi was elected with Pakistan’s support and that Kashmir would soon become part of Pakistan due to his policies.

Here is the link and archive link to the post, along with a screenshot.

• https://www.instagram.com/reel/DTvdOBjjVpi/ 

‍

‍

Fact Check:

‍

To verify the claim, the Desk conducted a Google Lens search, which led to a video uploaded on January 20, 2026, on the official YouTube channel of Jammu and Kashmir–based news outlet JKUpdate. The footage was an extended version of the viral clip and featured identical visuals. The original video showed Surinder Choudhary addressing the media on the sidelines of the inaugural two-day JKNC Convention of Block Presidents and Secretaries in the Jammu province. A review of the full media interaction revealed that Choudhary did not make any statements calling Prime Minister Modi an ISI agent or suggesting that Kashmir should join Pakistan.

Instead, in the original footage, Choudhary was seen criticising former Jammu and Kashmir Chief Minister and PDP leader Mehbooba Mufti for supporting the BJP during the bifurcation of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh into two Union Territories. He also spoke about the challenges faced by the region after the abrogation of Article 370 and demanded the restoration of full statehood for Jammu and Kashmir. During the interaction, Choudhary said that anyone attempting to divide Jammu and Kashmir at the state or regional level was effectively following Pakistan’s agenda and Jinnah’s two-nation theory. He added that such individuals could not be considered patriots.

‍

Here is the link to the video, along with a screenshot.

‍

• https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0kXkzUTK9cM 

‍

‍

In the next phase of the research , the Desk extracted the audio from the viral clip and analysed it using the AI-based audio detection tool Aurigin. The analysis indicated that the voice in the viral video was partially AI-generated, further confirming that the clip had been tampered with.

‍

Below is a screenshot of the result.

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

Multiple social media users shared a video claiming it showed Jammu and Kashmir Deputy Chief Minister Surinder Choudhary calling Prime Minister Narendra Modi an agent of the ISI. However, the CyberPeace found that the viral video was digitally manipulated. While the visuals were taken from a genuine media interaction with the leader, a fabricated audio track was overlaid to attribute the statements to him falsely.

‍

India’s Rapid Digital Expansion

‍
‍

‍

Over the past decade, India has experienced a rapid digitalisation process. The rise of digital financial services,  affordable internet costs, and the penetration of smartphones have transformed the way people communicate, transact and do business online.

Online payment systems, including Unified Payments Interface (UPI), have enabled real-time transactions between banks and financial systems. As much as these systems have enhanced access to finance and efficiency, they have also created new opportunities for cybercriminals.

Cybercrime has evolved alongside the shift of financial and social interactions to digital platforms. The fraud attacks on online payments, online banking, and personal information have become common and increasingly costly.

To analyse the scale and trend of cybercrime in India, this analysis will use the datasets released by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) and financial fraud data released by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C) under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
‍

The Rise of Cybercrime in India
‍

‍

The Rise of Cybercrime in India
‍

Source: National Crime Records Bureau – Crime in India Reports

The data released by the NCRB documents cybercrime incidents registered by the police at the national level under the Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act) and criminal provisions covering offences such as cheating, impersonation, and digital fraud. In the past, the offences were listed in the provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Following criminal law reforms in India, on 1 July 2024, the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), which replaced the IPC, came into force. Section 419 (cheating by impersonation), IPC, would be related to BNS Section 319 and Section 420 (cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), which would be related to BNS Section 318(4). Similarly, crimes involving forgery and use of forged documents or electronic documents, which were previously contained in the IPC Sections 465-471, are dealt with in BNS Sections 335-340.

The data published by the NCRB represent the number of crimes that reached the point of the First Information Report (FIR) registration, meaning they reflect only cybercrime cases that were formally presented to the law enforcement system to investigate, rather than all complaints reported. The data shows that cybercrime cases increased from 27,248 in 2018 to 86,420 in 2023, a 3.17-fold increase in 5 years.

Two structural shifts are visible: the post-pandemic jump and subsequent acceleration.

However, these figures likely underestimate the true scale of cybercrime because many incidents are reported only through online complaint portals and may not result in FIR registration.
‍

The Financial Scale of Digital Fraud

‍

‍

The Financial Scale of Digital Fraud

‍

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs via,  Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), and National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP)

This dataset tracks financial fraud complaints reported through the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP) and the estimated financial losses associated with those complaints.

The financial losses reported between 2021 and 2024 increased by 41 times over four years, compared to 2021, from 551 crore to 22,848 crore. At the same time, the number of complaints rose from 262,846 to over 1.9 million, an increase of ~623%, indicating both rising victimisation and greater public awareness of reporting mechanisms.

The contrast between these two trends is striking:
‍

While complaints increased by around 7 times, financial losses increased by over 40 times. 

‍

‍

Distribution of Cyber-Fraud Complaints and Financial Losses by Fraud Type
‍

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs via Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre and National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal; analysis based on reporting in Business Standard using government cyber-fraud data.
‍

This divergence implies an uneven relationship between the number of incidents and the financial damage that they inflict. Most cyber fraud incidents involve relatively small transaction values; however, a smaller group of fraud categories result in disproportionate numbers of financial losses.
‍

‍

Distribution of Financial Losses Across Major Cyber-Fraud Categories in India

‍

Source: Ministry of Home Affairs via,  Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), and National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal (NCRP) figures reported by The Indian Express
‍

As reported by The Indian Express, based on the data compiled by the I4C, investment-related scams alone account for roughly 77% of reported cyber-fraud losses, followed by smaller shares from “digital arrest” scams (8%), credit card fraud (7%), sextortion (4%), e-commerce fraud (3%), and malware or app-based fraud (1%). This distribution means that even though scams with lower values, like phishing, OTP fraud, and small payment fraud, produce a high proportion of complaints, few categories of fraud produce most of the financial losses.

‍

Analysis

‍

1. Cybercrime is expanding faster than most traditional crimes: The fact that cybercrime cases have tripled in five years shows that cyber offences are presently becoming a significant element of Indian crime. Unlike conventional crimes that require physical proximity, cybercrime can be conducted remotely and at scale, enabling perpetrators to target large numbers of victims simultaneously.

2. Financial losses are concentrated in a small set of fraud categories: As cases of cybercrimes have been on the increase, the monetary losses of digital fraud cases have been increasing at a higher rate. The fact that the number of reported financial losses has increased 40 times in 4 years indicates that cybercrime has a very high economic impact.

3. Complaint volumes and financial damage follow different patterns: When comparing complaints and financial losses, it is evident that cyber fraud losses are unevenly distributed across types of incidents. Most of the prevalent scams reported, including phishing or OTP fraud, involve relatively small transaction values but yield a high portion of complaints. Conversely, fewer categories of fraud, especially investment-based schemes, contribute a significantly higher percentage of total financial losses.

4. Digital financial infrastructure has expanded the attack surface: India’s rapid adoption of digital payment systems, mobile banking and digital  financial systems has dramatically increased the number of potential victims of cybercriminals. The scale of online transactions creates new vulnerabilities that organised cybercrime networks take advantage of.

5. Reporting improvements reveal previously hidden crime: The expansion of national reporting systems has enhanced the transparency in the trends of cybercrime. The increase in the number of complaints recorded is partially due to improved reporting systems and not necessarily to the increased criminal activity, meaning that previous data might have understated the magnitude of cyber fraud.

Recommendations
‍

1. Move from reactive policing to proactive cyber-risk monitoring: The conventional models of policing focus on investigation of crimes that have already taken place. With such a magnitude and pace of cyber fraud, India should have systems that are designed to detect and prevent the fraud at its early stages, such as real-time observation of suspicious patterns in transactions by financial institutions.

2. Strengthen financial intelligence sharing across institutions: There are a lot of instances of cyber fraud that use more than one bank, payment system, and telecommunication provider. To detect new networks of fraud sooner, it can be suggested to establish more information-sharing measures between the financial institution and law enforcement agencies.

3. Target organised cyber fraud networks rather than individual incidents: Many digital scams operate through organised networks that coordinate phishing, mule accounts, and fake payment channels. The solution in regard to this involves dismantling these networks through investigative procedures instead of treating incidents on a case-by-case basis.

4. Improve recovery mechanisms for stolen funds: The recovery of the funds lost is one of the most difficult issues in cases of cyber fraud. Expanding systems such as the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS) can improve the speed at which fraudulent transactions are frozen or reversed.

5. Strengthen digital financial literacy: A significant percentage of cyber frauds are based on social engineering methods that take advantage of user behaviour as opposed to technical weaknesses. Victimisation can be greatly reduced through specific public awareness efforts on typical scam schemes.

Conclusion
‍

India’s experience illustrates a broader global trend: as economies digitise, crime increasingly follows the flow of digital money. While cybercrime incidents are rising steadily, the much faster growth in financial losses suggests that cybercriminals are becoming more organised, technologically sophisticated, and economically motivated.

‍

References:
‍

• https://indianexpress.com/article/india/indians-lost-rs-53000-crore-fraud-cheating-cases-six-years-maharashtra-2025-10452185/ 
• https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2226441&reg=3&lang=2 -
• https://www.ncrb.gov.in/crime-in-india.html 
• https://i4c.mha.gov.in/index.aspx 
• https://i4c.mha.gov.in/index.aspx 

‍