#FactCheck - Viral Image of Bridge claims to be of Mumbai, but in reality it's located in Qingdao, China
Executive Summary:
The photograph of a bridge allegedly in Mumbai, India circulated through social media was found to be false. Through investigations such as reverse image searches, examination of similar videos, and comparison with reputable news sources and google images, it has been found that the bridge in the viral photo is the Qingdao Jiaozhou Bay Bridge located in Qingdao, China. Multiple pieces of evidence, including matching architectural features and corroborating videos tell us that the bridge is not from Mumbai. No credible reports or sources have been found to prove the existence of a similar bridge in Mumbai.

Claims:
Social media users claim a viral image of the bridge is from Mumbai.



Fact Check:
Once the image was received, it was investigated under the reverse image search to find any lead or any information related to it. We found an image published by Mirror News media outlet, though we are still unsure but we can see the same upper pillars and the foundation pillars with the same color i.e white in the viral image.

The name of the Bridge is Jiaozhou Bay Bridge located in China, which connects the eastern port city of the country to an offshore island named Huangdao.
Taking a cue from this we then searched for the Bridge to find any other relatable images or videos. We found a YouTube Video uploaded by a channel named xuxiaopang, which has some similar structures like pillars and road design.

In reverse image search, we found another news article that tells about the same bridge in China, which is more likely similar looking.

Upon lack of evidence and credible sources for opening a similar bridge in Mumbai, and after a thorough investigation we concluded that the claim made in the viral image is misleading and false. It’s a bridge located in China not in Mumbai.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, after fact-checking it was found that the viral image of the bridge allegedly in Mumbai, India was claimed to be false. The bridge in the picture climbed to be Qingdao Jiaozhou Bay Bridge actually happened to be located in Qingdao, China. Several sources such as reverse image searches, videos, and reliable news outlets prove the same. No evidence exists to suggest that there is such a bridge like that in Mumbai. Therefore, this claim is false because the actual bridge is in China, not in Mumbai.
- Claim: The bridge seen in the popular social media posts is in Mumbai.
- Claimed on: X (formerly known as Twitter), Facebook,
- Fact Check: Fake & Misleading
Related Blogs
.webp)
Introduction
The AI Action Summit is a global forum that brings together world leaders, policymakers, technology experts, and industry representatives to discuss AI governance, ethics, and its role in society. This year, the week-long Paris AI Action Summit officially culminated on the 11th of February, 2025. It brought together experts from the industry, policymakers, and other dignitaries to discuss Artificial Intelligence and its challenges. The event was co-chaired by Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and French President Emmanuel Macron. In line with the summit, the Indian delegation actively engaged in the 2nd India-France AI Policy Roundtable, an official side event of the summit, and the 14th India-France CEOs Forum. These discussions were on diverse sectors including defense, aerospace, technology, etc. among other things.
Prime Minister Modi’s Address
During the AI Action Summit in Paris, Prime Minister Narendra Modi drew attention to the revolutionary effect of AI in politics, the economy, security, and society. Stressing the requirement of international cooperation, he promoted strong frameworks of governance to combat AI-based risks and consequently, build public confidence in new technologies. Needed efforts with respect to cybersecurity issues such as deepfakes and disinformation were also acknowledged.
Democratising AI, and sharing its benefits, particularly with the Global South not only aligned with Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) but also affirmed India’s resolve towards sharing expertise and best practices. India’s remarkable feat of creating a Digital Public Infrastructure, that caters to a population of 1.4 billion through open and accessible technology was highlighted as well.
Among the key announcements, India revealed its plans to create its own Large Language Model (LLM) that reflects the country's linguistic diversity, strengthening its AI aspirations. Further, India will be hosting the next AI Action Summit, reaffirming its position in international AI leadership. The Prime Minister also welcomed France's initiatives, such as the launch of the "AI Foundation" and the "Council for Sustainable AI", initiated by President Emmanuel Macron. He emphasized the necessity to extend the Global Partnership for AI and to get it more representative and inclusive so that Global South voices are actually incorporated into AI innovation and governance.
Other Perspectives
Though there were 58 countries that signed the international agreement on a more open, inclusive, sustainable, and ethical approach to AI development (including India, France, and China), the UK and the US have refused to sign the international agreement at the AI Summit stating their issues with global governance and national security. While the former raised concerns about the lack of sufficient details regarding the establishment of global AI governance and AI’s effect on national security as their reason, the latter showcased its reservations about the overly wide AI regulations which had the potential to hamper a transformative industry. Meanwhile, the US is also looking forward to ‘Stargate’, its $500 billion AI infrastructure project alongside the companies- OpenAI, Softbank, and Oracle.
CyberPeace Insights
The Summit has garnered greater significance with the backdrop of the release of platforms such as DeepSeek R1, China’s AI assistant system similar to that of OpenAI’s ChatGPT. On its release, it was the top-rated free application on Apple’s app store and sent the technology stocks tumbling. Moreover, investors world over appreciated the creation of the model which was made roughly in about $5 million while other AI companies spent more in comparison (keeping in mind the restrictions caused by the chip export controls in China). This breakthrough challenges the conventional notion that massive funding is a prerequisite for innovation, offering hope for India’s burgeoning AI ecosystem. With the IndiaAI mission and fewer geopolitical restrictions, India stands at a pivotal moment to drive responsible AI advancements.
References:
- https://www.mea.gov.in/press-releases.htm?dtl/39023/Prime_Minister_cochairs_AI_Action_Summit_in_Paris_February_11_2025
- https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-sci-tech/what-is-stargate-trumps-500-billion-ai-project-9793165/
- https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2102056
- https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2101947
- https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2101896
- https://www.timesnownews.com/technology-science/uk-and-us-decline-to-sign-global-ai-agreement-at-paris-ai-action-summit-here-is-why-article-118164497
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/india-57-others-sign-paris-joint-statement-on-inclusive-sustainable-ai/article69207937.ece

Introduction
A disturbing trend of courier-related cyber scams has emerged, targeting unsuspecting individuals across India. In these scams, fraudsters pose as officials from reputable organisations, such as courier companies or government departments like the narcotics bureau. Using sophisticated social engineering tactics, they deceive victims into divulging personal information and transferring money under false pretences. Recently, a woman IT professional from Mumbai fell victim to such a scam, losing Rs 1.97 lakh.
Instances of courier-related cyber scams
Recently, two significant cases of courier-related cyber scams have surfaced, illustrating the alarming prevalence of such fraudulent activities.
- Case in Delhi: A doctor in Delhi fell victim to an online scam, resulting in a staggering loss of approximately Rs 4.47 crore. The scam involved fraudsters posing as representatives of a courier company. They informed the doctor about a seized package and requested substantial money for verification purposes. Tragically, the doctor trusted the callers and lost substantial money.
- Case in Mumbai: In a strikingly similar incident, an IT professional from Mumbai, Maharashtra, lost Rs 1.97 lakh to cyber fraudsters pretending to be officials from the narcotics department. The fraudsters contacted the victim, claiming her Aadhaar number was linked to the criminals’ bank accounts. They coerced the victim into transferring money for verification through deceptive tactics and false evidence, resulting in a significant financial loss.
These recent cases highlight the growing threat of courier-related cyber scams and the devastating impact they can have on unsuspecting individuals. It emphasises the urgent need for increased awareness, vigilance, and preventive measures to protect oneself from falling victim to such fraudulent schemes.
Nature of the Attack
The cyber scam typically begins with a fraudulent call from someone claiming to be associated with a courier company. They inform the victim that their package is stuck or has been seized, escalating the situation by involving law enforcement agencies, such as the narcotics department. The fraudsters manipulate victims by creating a sense of urgency and fear, convincing them to download communication apps like Skype to establish credibility. Fabricated evidence and false claims trick victims into sharing personal information, including Aadhaar numbers, and coercing them to make financial transactions for verification purposes.
Best Practices to Stay Safe
To protect oneself from courier-related cyber scams and similar frauds, individuals should follow these best practices:
- Verify Calls and Identity: Be cautious when receiving calls from unknown numbers. Verify the caller’s identity by cross-checking with relevant authorities or organisations before sharing personal information.
- Exercise Caution with Personal Information: Avoid sharing sensitive personal information, such as Aadhaar numbers, bank account details, or passwords, over the phone or through messaging apps unless necessary and with trusted sources.
- Beware of Urgency and Threats: Scammers often create a sense of urgency or threaten legal consequences to manipulate victims. Remain vigilant and question any unexpected demands for money or personal information.
- Double-Check Suspicious Claims: If contacted by someone claiming to be from a government department or law enforcement agency, independently verify their credentials by contacting the official helpline or visiting the department’s official website.
- Educate and Spread Awareness: Share information about these scams with friends, family, and colleagues to raise awareness and collectively prevent others from falling victim to such frauds.
Legal Remedies
In case of falling victim to a courier-related cyber scam, individuals can sort to take the following legal actions:
- File a First Information Report (FIR): In case of falling victim to a courier-related cyber scam or any similar online fraud, individuals have legal options available to seek justice and potentially recover their losses. One of the primary legal actions that can be taken is to file a First Information Report (FIR) with the local police. The following sections of Indian law may be applicable in such cases:
- Section 419 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC): This section deals with the offence of cheating by impersonation. It states that whoever cheats by impersonating another person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with a fine, or both.
- Section 420 of the IPC: This section covers the offence of cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property. It states that whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person deceived to deliver any property shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to seven years and shall also be liable to pay a fine.
- Section 66(C) of the Information Technology (IT) Act, 2000: This section deals with the offence of identity theft. It states that whoever, fraudulently or dishonestly, makes use of the electronic signature, password, or any other unique identification feature of any other person shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to pay a fine.
- Section 66(D) of the IT Act, 2000 pertains to the offence of cheating by personation by using a computer resource. It states that whoever, by means of any communication device or computer resource, cheats by personating shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to pay a fine.
- National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal- One powerful resource available to victims is the National Cyber Crime Reporting Portal, equipped with a 24×7 helpline number, 1930. This portal serves as a centralised platform for reporting cybercrimes, including financial fraud.
Conclusion:
The rise of courier-related cyber scams demands increased vigilance from individuals to protect themselves against fraud. Heightened awareness, caution, and scepticism when dealing with unknown callers or suspicious requests are crucial. By following best practices, such as verifying identities, avoiding sharing sensitive information, and staying updated on emerging scams, individuals can minimise the risk of falling victim to these fraudulent schemes. Furthermore, spreading awareness about such scams and promoting cybersecurity education will play a vital role in creating a safer digital environment for everyone.

Introduction
In the contemporary information environment, misinformation has emerged as a subtle yet powerful force capable of shaping public perception, influencing behavior, and undermining institutional credibility. Unlike overt falsehoods, misinformation often gains traction because it appears authentic, familiar, and authoritative. The rapid circulation of content through digital platforms has intensified this challenge, allowing altered or misleading material to reach wide audiences before verification mechanisms can respond. When misinformation mimics official communication, its impact becomes especially concerning, as citizens tend to place implicit trust in documents that carry the appearance of state authority. This growing vulnerability of public information systems was illustrated by the calendar incident in Himachal Pradesh in January 2026.
The calendar incident of Himachal Pradesh in January 2026 shows how a small lie can lead to large social and governance problems. A person whose identity is still unknown posted a modified version of the Government Calendar 2026, changing the official dates and resulting in public confusion and reputational damage to the Printing and Stationery Department. The incident may not appear very serious at first sight, but it indicates a deeper systemic issue. Misinformation is posing increasing dangers to public information ecosystems, especially when official documents are misrepresented and disseminated through digital platforms.
Misinformation as a Governance Challenge
Government calendars and official documents are necessary for public awareness and administrative coordination, and their manipulation impedes the credibility of institutions and the trustworthiness of governance. In Himachal Pradesh, modified dates might have led to confusion regarding public holidays, interference in school and administrative planning, and misinformation among the people. Such misinformation is a direct interference in the social contract that exists between the citizens and the State, where accurate information is the foundation of trust, compliance, and participation.
Impact on Citizens: Confusion, Distrust, and Digital Fatigue
For the general public, the dissemination of fake government information leads to a situation where people are confused and, at the same time, lose their trust in the government communication channels. If someone continuously gets to see the changed or misleading information misrepresented as credible, that person will find it hard to differentiate the truth from lies in the end.
This results in:
- Decision paralysis occurs when the public cannot make up their minds and either postpones or refrains from action due to the doubts they have
- Erosion of trust, not only in one department but also in the whole government communications department
- Digital fatigue occurs when people stop following public information completely, since they think that all content can be unreliable
Misinformation in a digital society is not limited to one platform only. It spreads quickly through direct messaging apps, community groups, and social networks, thus creating greater confusion among people before the official clarifications can reach the same audience.
Institutional Harm and Reputational Damage
The intentional tampering with official documents is not only a violation of ethics but also a crime and an immoral act from a governance perspective. The Printing and Stationery Department noted that such practices tarnish the public image of government bodies, which are based on accuracy, neutrality, and trust.
When untrue material gets to be known as official content:
- Departments have to communicate reactively.
- Money and manpower that could have been used for the normal administrative work are now spent on the control of the situation.
The registration of a First Information Report (FIR) in this matter is an indication of the gradual shift in the perception of law enforcement agencies that misinformation is not a playful act but rather a technology-assisted crime with serious consequences.
The Role of Verifiable Information and Trusted Sources
Such occurrences stress the need for trustworthy information as well as confirmed sources to be at the centre of the digital era. It should be the responsibility of the authorities to lead the citizens to practice and ENABLING to depend on official websites, verified social media accounts, government portals, and press releases for authentication.
Platform Responsibility and Digital Literacy
The spread of misinformation poses a significant challenge for social media platforms, which frequently amplify highly engaging content. There are some ways that the social media networks can try to limit the damage, and these are: tagging of non-verified material, limiting the sharing and working with authorities in the area of fact-checking support. However, one more thing which is crucial here is ‘public knowledge’ about digital platforms, as even unintentional dissemination of fake “official” materials can lead to legal and social repercussions. The advice of the Himachal state government is a good thing, but constantly informing the public is still a requirement.
Legal Accountability as a Deterrent
The active participation of the Cyber Crime Cells unequivocally indicates that digital misinformation, especially involving government documents, will face severe consequences. The establishment of legal responsibility acts as a preventive measure and reiterates the notion that the right to speak one's mind does not cover the right to lie or undermine public institutions. Nonetheless, to have an effective enforcement, it has to be accompanied by preventive actions such as good communication, strong governance, and public trust-building. Consistent enforcement against digital misinformation can contribute to greater accountability within society. Digital Literacy programs should be conducted periodically for netizens and institutions.
Conclusion
The incident of the creation of fake calendars in Himachal Pradesh served as a signal for the authorities to adopt accurate communication strategies. The ratification of misinformation can be achieved only if there is shared participation of governments, digital platforms, citizens and civil societies. The main goal of all this is to maintain public trust and the dissemination of information in democratic processes.