#FactCheck - Viral Video Falsely Attributes Statements on ‘Operation Sindoor’ to Army Chief
Executive Summary
A video widely circulated on social media claims to show a confrontation between a Zee News journalist and Chief of Army Staff (COAS) General Upendra Dwivedi during the Indian Army’s Annual Press Briefing 2026. The video alleges that General Dwivedi made sensitive remarks regarding ‘Operation Sindoor’, including claims that the operation was still ongoing and that diplomatic intervention by former US President Donald Trump had restricted India’s military response. Several social media users shared the clip while questioning the Indian Army’s operational decisions and demanding accountability over the alleged remarks. The CyberPeace concludes that the viral video claiming to show a discussion between a Zee News journalist and Chief of Army Staff General Upendra Dwivedi on ‘Operation Sindoor’ is misleading and digitally manipulated. Although the visuals were sourced from the Indian Army’s Annual Press Briefing 2026, the audio was artificially created and added later to misinform viewers. The Army Chief did not make any remarks regarding diplomatic interference or limitations on military action during the briefing.
Claim:
An X (formerly Twitter) user, Abbas Chandio (@AbbasChandio__), shared the video on January 14, asserting that it showed a Zee News journalist questioning the Army Chief about the status and outcomes of ‘Operation Sindoor’ during a recent press conference. In the clip, the journalist is purportedly heard challenging the Army Chief over his earlier statement that the operation was “still ongoing,” while the COAS is allegedly heard responding that diplomatic intervention during the conflict limited the Army’s ability to pursue further military action. Here is the link and archive link to the post, along with a screenshot.
The reverse image search also directed to an extended version of the footage uploaded on the official YouTube channel of India Today. The original video was identified as coverage from the Indian Army’s Annual Press Conference 2026, held on January 13 in New Delhi and addressed by COAS General Upendra Dwivedi. Upon reviewing the original press briefing footage, CyberPeace found no instance where a Zee News journalist questioned the Army Chief about ‘Operation Sindoor’. There was also no mention of the statements attributed to General Dwivedi in the viral clip.
In the authentic footage, journalist Anuvesh Rath was seen raising questions related to defence procurement and modernization, not military operations or diplomatic interventions. Here is the link to the original video, along with a screenshot.

To further verify the claim, CyberPeace extracted the audio track from the viral video and analysed it using the AI-based voice detection tool Aurigin. The analysis revealed that the voice heard in the clip was artificially generated, indicating the use of synthetic or manipulated audio. This confirmed that while genuine visuals from the Army’s official press briefing were used, a fabricated audio track had been overlaid to falsely attribute controversial statements to the Army Chief and a Zee News journalist.

Conclusion
The CyberPeace concludes that the viral video claiming to show a discussion between a Zee News journalist and Chief of Army Staff General Upendra Dwivedi on ‘Operation Sindoor’ is misleading and digitally manipulated. Although the visuals were sourced from the Indian Army’s Annual Press Briefing 2026, the audio was artificially created and added later to misinform viewers. The Army Chief did not make any remarks regarding diplomatic interference or limitations on military action during the briefing. The video is a clear case of digital manipulation and misinformation, aimed at creating confusion and casting doubts over the Indian Army’s official position.
Related Blogs

The recent Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, that came into force in August, has been one of the most widely anticipated regulations in the digital entertainment industry. Among provisions such as promoting esports and licensing of online gaming, the legislation notably introduces a blanket ban on real-money gaming (RMG). The rationale behind this was to reduce its addictive effects, protect minors, and limit the circulation of black-money. However, in reality, the Act has spawned apprehension about the legislative process, regulatory redundancy, and unintended consequences that can shift users and revenue to offshore operators.
From Debate to Prohibition: How the Act was Passed
The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act was passed as a central law, providing the earlier fragmented state laws on online betting and gambling with an overarching framework. Proponents argue that, among other provisions, some kind of unified national framework was needed to deal with the scale of online betting due to its detrimental impact on young users. The current Act is a direct transition to criminalisation rather than the swings of self-regulation and partial restrictions used during the previous decade of incremental experiments in regulation. Stakeholders in the industry believe that this type of sudden, blanket action creates uncertainty and erodes confidence in the system in the long run. Further, critics have pointed out that the Bill was passed without adequate Parliamentary deliberation. A question has been raised about whether procedural safeguards were upheld.
Prohibition of Online RMG
Within the Indian context, a distinction has long been drawn between games of skill and games of chance, with the latter, like a lottery or a casino, being severely prohibited under state laws, whereas the former, like rummy or fantasy sports, have generally been allowed after being recognized as skill-based by court authorities. The Online Gaming Act of 2025 abolishes this distinction on the internet, thus banning all RMG actions that include cash transactions, regardless of skill or chance. The act also criminalises the advertising, facilitation, and hosting of such sites, thereby penalizing offshore operators with an Indian customer focus, and subjecting their payment gateways, app stores, and advertisers under its jurisdiction to penalties.
The Problem of Overlap
One potential issue that the Act presents is its overlap with the existing laws. The IT Rules 2023 mandate intermediaries in the gaming sector to appoint compliance officers, submit monthly reports, and undergo due diligence. The new Act introduces a three-level classification of games, whereas the advisories of the Central Consumer Protection Authority (CCPA) under the Consumer Protection Act treat online betting as an unfair trade practice.
This multiplicity of regulations builds a maze where different Ministries and state governments have overlapping jurisdiction. Policy experts caution that such an overlap can create enforcement challenges, punish players who act within the law, and leave offshore malefactors undetected.
Unintended Consequences: Driving Users Offshore
Outright prohibition will hardly ever remove demand; it will only push it out. Offshore sites have taken advantage of the situation as Indian operators like Dream11 shut down their money games after the ban. It has already been reported that there is aggressive advertising by foreign betting companies that are not registered in India, most of which have backend infrastructure that cannot be regulated by the Act (Storyboard18).
This diversion of users to unregulated markets has two main risks. First, Indian players are deprived of the consumer protection offered to them in local regulation, and their data can be sent to suspicious foreign organizations. Second, the government loses control over the money flow that can be transferred via informal channels or cryptocurrencies or other obscure systems. Industry analysts are alerting that such developments may only worsen the issue of black-money instead of solving it (IGamingBusiness).
Advertising, Age Gating, and Digital Rights
The Act has also strengthened advertisement regulations, aligning with advisories issued by the Advertising Standards Council of India, which prohibits the targeting of minors. However, critics believe that the application remains inadequately enforced, and children can with comparative ease access unregulated overseas applications. In the absence of complementary digital literacy programs and strong parental controls, these limitations can be effectively superficial instead of real.
Privacy advocates also warn that frequent prompts, vague messages, or invasive surveillance can weaken the digital rights of users instead of strengthening them. Overregulation has also been found to create banner blindness in global contexts where users ignore warnings without first clearly understanding them.
Enforcement Challenges
The Act puts a lot of responsibilities on many stakeholders, including the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB) and the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). Platforms like Google Play and Apple App Store are expected to verify government-approved lists of compliant gaming apps and remove non-compliant or banned ones, as directed by the MIB and the RBI. Although this pressure may motivate intermediaries to collaborate, it may also have a risk of overreach when it is applied unequally or in a political way.
According to the experts, the solution should be underpinned by technology itself. Artificial intelligence can be used to identify illegal advertisements, track illegal gaming in children, and trace payment streams. At the same time, the regulators should be able to issue final lists of either compliant or non-compliant applications to advise the consumers and intermediaries alike. Without such practical provisions, enforcement risks remaining patchy.
Online Gaming Rules
On 1 October 2025, the government issued a draft of the Online Gaming Rules in accordance with the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act. The regulations focus on the creation of the compliance frameworks, define the classification of the allowed gaming activities, and prescribe grievance-redressal mechanisms aiming to promote the protection of the players and procedural transparency. However, the draft does not revisit or soften the existing blanket prohibition on real-money gaming (RMG) and, hence, the questions about the effectiveness of enforcement and regulatory clarity remain open (Times of India, 2025).
Protecting Consumers Without Stifling Innovation
The ban highlights a larger conflict, i.e., the protection of the vulnerable users without stifling an industry that has traditionally contributed to innovation, jobs, and the collection of tax revenue. Online gaming has significantly added to the GST collections, and the sudden shakeup brings fiscal concerns (Reuters).
Several legal objections to the Act have already been brought, asking whether the Act is constitutional, especially as to whether the restrictions are proportional to the right to trade. The outcome of such cases will define the future trajectory of the digital economy of India (Reuters).
Way Forward
Instead of outright prohibition, a more balanced approach that incorporates regulation and consumer protection is suggested by the experts. Key measures could include:
- A definite difference between games of skill and games of chance, with proportionate regulation.
- Age confirmation and campaign against online illiteracy to protect the underage population.
- Enhanced advertising and payments compliance requirements and enforceable non-compliance penalty.
- Coordinated oversight among different ministries to prevent duplication and regulatory struggle.
- Leveraging AI and fintech to track illegal financial activities (black money flows) and developing innovation.
Conclusion
The Online Gaming Act 2025 addresses social issues, such as addiction, monetary risk, and child safety, that require governance interventions. However, the path it follows to this end, that of total prohibition, is more likely to spawn a new set of issues instead of providing solutions because it will send consumers to offshore sites, undermine consumer rights, and slow innovation.
For India, the real challenge is not whether to prohibit online money gaming but how to create a balanced, transparent, and enforceable framework that protects users while fostering a responsible gaming ecosystem. India can reduce the adverse consequences of online betting without keeping the industry in the shadows with better coordination, reasonable use of technology, and balanced protection.
References:
- India's Dream11, top gaming apps halt money-based games after ban
- India online gambling ban could drive punters to black market
- Offshore betting firms with backend ops in India not covered by online gaming law
- The Great Gamble: India’s Online Gaming Ban, The GST Battle, And What Lies Ahead.
- Game Over for Online Money Games? An Analysis of the Online Gaming Act 2025
- Government gambles heavily on prohibiting online money gaming
- Online gaming regulation: New rules to take effect from October 1; government stresses consultative approach with industry
.webp)
Introduction
The judiciary as an institution has always been kept on a pedestal and is often seen as the embodiment of justice. From Dictatorship to Democracy, the judiciary plays a central role; even where the judiciary is controlled, the legitimacy of the policies, in one sense or another, is derived from it. In democracies around the world, the independence and well-being of the judiciary are seen as the barometer of democracy’s strength. In this global age, where technology is omnipresent, it seems the judiciary is no exception. Now more than ever, when the judiciary is at the centre of evaluative focus, it becomes imperative to make the judiciary transparent. Digitisation of the judiciary is not just an administrative reform; it is an extension of constitutionalism into the technological realm, an effort to ensure that justice is accessible, transparent, and efficient. On July 25, which is the International Day on Judicial Well-being, is commemorated every year with a clear message that judicial well-being supports “anti-corruption, access to justice, and sustainable peace.”
Digitisation by Design: Justice in the Age of Transformation
The Prime Minister of India envisioned the future of the Indian legal system in alignment with the digitised world, as when he said, “Technology will integrate police, forensics, jails, and courts, and will speed up their work as well. We are moving towards a justice system that will be fully future-ready,” he said, almost predicting the future. Although there are many challenges in the face of this future, there are various initiatives that ease the transition. To clarify, India is streamlining operations, reducing delays, and enhancing access to justice for all by integrating AI into legal research, case management, judicial procedures, and law enforcement. Machine Learning (ML), Natural Language Processing (NLP), Optical Character Recognition (OCR), and predictive analytics are just a few of the AI-powered technologies that are currently being used to increase crime prevention, automate administrative duties, and improve case monitoring.
The digitisation of Indian courts is a structural necessity rather than just a question of contemporary convenience. Miscarriages of justice have frequently resulted from the growing backlog of cases, challenges with maintaining records, and the loss of physical files. In the seminal case of State of U.P. v. Abhay Raj Singh, the courts acknowledged that a conviction could be overturned by missing records alone. With millions of legal documents at risk, digitisation becomes a shield against such a collapse and a tool for preserving judicial memory.
Judicial Digitalisation in India: Institutional Initiatives and Infrastructural Advancements
For centuries, towering bundles of courtroom files stood as dusty monuments to knowledge, sacred, chaotic, and accessible to a select few. But as we now stand in 2025, the physical boundaries of a traditional courtroom have blurred, and the Indian government is actively working towards transforming the legal system. The e-Courts Mission Mode Project is a flagship initiative that aims to utilise Information and Communication Technology (ICT) to modernise and advance the Indian judiciary. This groundbreaking effort, led by the Department of Justice, Government of India, is being carried out in close coordination with the Supreme Court of India’s e-Committee. As a news report suggests, the Supreme Court (SC) held 7.5 lakh hearings through video conferencing between 2020 and 2024, as stated by the Ministry of Law and Justice, responding to a query in the Rajya Sabha on Thursday. Technological tools such as the Supreme Court Vidhik Anuvaad Software (SUVAS), the Case Information Software (CIS), and the Supreme Court Portal for Assistance in Court’s Efficiency (SUPACE) were established to make all pertinent case facts easily available. In another move, the Registry, SC, in close coordination with IIT, Madras, has created and implemented AI and ML-based technologies that are integrated with the Registry’s electronic filing software. This serves as a statement to the fact that cybersecurity and digital infrastructure are no longer administrative add-ons but essential building blocks for ensuring judicial transparency, efficiency, and resilience.
E-Governance and Integrity: The Judiciary in Transition
The United Nations recognises the fundamentals of the judiciary’s well-being and how corruption acts like water to the rust and taints the integrity of not a single judge in general but creates a perception of the whole institution. This threat of corruption is recognised by the United Nations Convention against Corruption (UNCAC), particularly Article 11, which urges the protection of the judiciary’s independence and integrity. Digitisation, while it cannot operate in a vacuum, acts as a structural antidote to corruption by embedding transparency into the fabric of justice delivery as automated registry systems, e-filing, and real-time access to case data drastically reduce discretionary power and the potential for behind-the-scenes manipulation. However, digital systems are only as ethical as the people who design, maintain, and oversee them, bringing their own limitations.
Conclusion: CyberPeace and the Future of Ethical Digital Justice
The potential of digitalisation resides not just in efficiency but also in equity, as India’s judiciary balances tradition and change. A robust democracy, where justice is lit by code rather than hidden under files, is built on a foundation of an open, accessible, and technologically advanced court. This change is not risk-free, though. Secure justice must also be a component of digital justice. The very values that digitisation seeks to preserve are at risk from algorithmic opacity, data breaches, and insecure technologies.
Our vision is not just of a digitalised court system but of a digitally just society, one where judicial data is protected, legal processes are democratised, and innovation upholds constitutionalism. Therefore, as a step forward, CyberPeace resolves to support AI upskilling for legal professionals, advocate for secure-by-design court infrastructure, and facilitate dialogue between technologists and judicial actors to build trust in the digital justice ecosystem. CyberPeace is dedicated to cyber transparency, privacy protection, and ethical AI.
References
- https://www.un.org/en/observances/judicial-well-being
- https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2106239
- https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2106239
- https://www.barandbench.com/view-point/facilitating-legal-access-digitalization-of-supreme-court-high-court-records
- https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleaseIframePage.aspx?PRID=2085127
- https://www.medianama.com/2024/12/223-supreme-court-seven-lakh-video-conferences-four-year-rajya-sabha/

Introduction
Online dating platforms have become a common way for individuals to connect in today’s digital age. For many in the LGBTQ+ community, especially in environments where offline meeting spaces are limited, these platforms offer a way to find companionship and support. However, alongside these opportunities come serious risks. Users are increasingly being targeted by cybercrimes such as blackmail, sextortion, identity theft, and online harassment. These incidents often go unreported due to stigma and concerns about privacy. The impact of such crimes can be both emotional and financial, highlighting the need for greater awareness and digital safety.
Cybercrime On LGBTQ+ Dating Apps: A Threat Landscape
According to the NCRB 2022 report, there has been a 24.4% increase in cybercrimes. But unfortunately, the queer community-specific data is not available. Cybercrimes that target LGBTQ+ users in very organised and predatory. In several Indian cities, gangs actively monitor dating platforms to the point that potential victims, especially young queers and those who seem discreet about their identity, become targets. Once the contact is established, perpetrators use a standard operating process, building false trust, forcing private exchanges, and then gradually starting blackmail and financial exploitation. Many queer victims are blackmailed with threats of exposure to families or workplaces, often by fake police demanding bribes. Fear of stigma and insensitive policing discourages reporting. Cyber criminal gangs exploit these gaps on dating apps. Despite some arrests, under-reporting persists, and activists call for stronger platform safety.
Types of Cyber Crimes against Queer Community on Dating Apps
- Romance scam or “Lonely hearts scam”: Scammers build trust with false stories (military, doctors, NGO workers) and quickly express strong romantic interest. They later request money, claiming emergencies. They often try to create multiple accounts to avoid profile bans.
- Sugar daddy scam: In this type of scam, the fraudster offers money or allowance in exchange for things like chatting, sending photos, or other interactions. They usually offer a specific amount and want to use some uncommon payment gateways. After telling you they will send you a lot of money, they often make up a story like: “My last sugar baby cheated me, so now you must first send me a small amount to prove you are trustworthy.” This is just a trick to make you send them money first.
- Sextortion / Blackmail scam: Scammers record explicit chats or pretend to be underage, then threaten exposure unless you pay. Some target discreet users. Never send explicit content or pay blackmailers.
- Investment Scams: Scammers posing as traders or bankers convince victims to invest in fake opportunities. Some "flip" small amounts to build trust, then disappear with larger sums. Real investors won’t approach you on dating apps. Don’t share financial info or transfer money.
- Pay-Before-You-Meet scam: Scammer demands upfront payment (gift cards, gas money, membership fees) before meeting, then vanishes. Never pay anyone before meeting in person.
- Security app registration scam: Scammers ask you to register on fake "security apps" to steal your info, claiming it ensures your safety. Research apps before registering. Be wary of quick link requests.
- The Verification code scam: Scammers trick you into giving them SMS verification codes, allowing them to hijack your accounts. Never share verification codes with anyone.
- Third-party app links: Mass spam messages with suspicious links that steal info or infect devices. Don’t click suspicious links or “Google me” messages.
- Support message scam: Messages pretending to be from application support, offering prizes or fake shows to lure you to malicious sites.
Platform Accountability & Challenges
The issue of online dating platforms in India is characterised by weak grievance redressal, poor takedown of abusive profiles, and limited moderation practices. Most platforms appoint grievance officers or offer an in-app complaint portal, but complaints are often unanswered or receive only automated and AI-generated responses. This highlights the gap between policy and enforcement on the ground.
Abusive or fake profiles, often used for scams, hate crimes, and outing LGBTQ+ individuals, remain active long after being reported. In India, organised extortion gangs have exploited such profiles to lure, assault, rob, and blackmail queer men. Moderation teams often struggle with backlogs and lack the resources needed to handle even the most serious complaints.
Despite offering privacy settings and restricting profile visibility, moderation practices in India are still weak, leaving large segments of users vulnerable to impersonation, catfishing, and fraud. The concept of pseudonymisation can help protect vulnerable communities, but it is difficult to distinguish authentic users from malicious actors without robust, privacy-respecting verification systems.
Since many LGBTQ+ individuals prefer to maintain their confidentiality, while others are more vocal about their identities, in either case, the data shared by an individual with an online dating platform must be vigilantly protected. The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, mandates the protection of personal data. Section 8(4) provides: “A Data Fiduciary shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures to ensure effective observance of the provisions of this Act and the rules made thereunder.” Accordingly, digital platforms collecting such data should adopt the necessary technical and organisational measures to comply with data protection laws.
Recommendations
The Supreme Court has been proactive in this regard, through decisions like Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, which decriminalised same-sex relationships. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) v. Union of India and Ors., acknowledged the right to privacy as a fundamental right, and, most recently, the 2025 affirmation of the right to digital access. However, to protect LGBTQ+ people online, more robust legal frameworks are still required.
There is a requirement for a dedicated commission or an empowered LGBTQ+ cell. Like the National Commission for Women (NCW), which works to safeguard the rights of women, a similar commission would address community-specific issues, including cybercrime, privacy violations, and discrimination on digital platforms. It may serve as an institutional link between the victim, the digital platforms, the government, and the police. Dating Platforms must enhance their security features and grievance mechanisms to safeguard the users.
Best Practices
Scammers use data sets and plans to target individuals seeking specific interests, such as love, sex, money, or association. Do not make financial transactions, such as signing up for third-party platforms or services. Scammers may attempt to create accounts for others, which can be used to access dating platforms and harm legitimate users. Users should be vigilant about sharing sensitive information, such as private images, contact information, or addresses, as scammers can use this information to threaten users. Stay smart, stay cyber safe.
References
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/htcity/cinema/16yearold-queer-child-pranshu-dies-by-suicide-due-to-bullying-did-we-fail-as-a-society-mental-health-expert-opines-101701172202794.html#google_vignette
- https://www.ijsr.net/archive/v11i6/SR22617213031.pdf
- https://help.grindr.com/hc/en-us/articles/1500009328241-Scam-awareness-guide
- http://meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2024/06/2bf1f0e9f04e6fb4f8fef35e82c42aa5.pdf
- https://mib.gov.in/sites/default/files/2024-02/IT%28Intermediary%20Guidelines%20and%20Digital%20Media%20Ethics%20Code%29%20Rules%2C%202021%20English.pdf