#FactCheck-Fake Video of Mass Cheating at UPSC Exam Circulates Online

Introduction

In the rapidly evolving landscape of cyber threats, a novel menace has surfaced the concept of Digital Arrest. The impostors impersonating law enforcement officers deceive the victims into believing that their bank account, SIM card, Aadhaar card, or bank card has been used unlawfully. They coerce victims into paying them money. Digital Arrest involves the virtual restraint of individuals. These suspensions can vary from restricted access to the account(s), and digital platforms, to implementing measures to prevent further digital activities or being restrained on video calling or being monitored through video calling. In the era of digitisation where the technology is growing on an exponential phase, various existing loopholes are being utilised by the wrongdoers which has given rise to this sinister trend known as “digital arrest fraud”. In this scam, the defrauder manipulates the victims, who impersonate law enforcement officials and further traps the victims into a web of deception involving threats of imminent digital restraint and coerced financial transactions.   

Recognizing the Danger of Digital Arrest

A recent case involving an interactive voice response (IVR) call that targeted a victim sheds light on the complexities of the "digital arrest" cybercrime. The victim was notified by the scammers—who were pretending to be law enforcement officers—that a SIM card in her name had apparently been utilised in a criminal incident in Mumbai. The call proceeded to a video conversation with an FBI agent who falsely accused her of being involved in money laundering. The victim was forced into a web of dishonesty because she now believed she was involved in a criminal case, underscoring the psychological manipulation these hackers were using.

Recent incidents of digital arrest fraud  

• Recently, a complaint was registered at the Noida Cyber Crime Police Station made by a 50-year-old victim, who was deceived of over Rs 11 lakh and exposed to "digital arrest". By using the identities of an IPS officer in the CBI and the founder of an airline that was grounded, the attackers, masquerading as law enforcement officers, falsely accused the victim of being involved in a fake money-laundering case. She was told that she had another SIM card in her name that was used for fraudulent activities in Mumbai. The complaint made by the victim asserted “Victim’s call was transferred to a person (who identified himself as a Mumbai Police officer) who conducted the initial interrogation over the call and then on Skype VC, where she stayed from 9:30 AM to around 7 in the evening. The woman ended up transferring around ₹11.11 lakh. The scammers then ended contact with her, after which she realised she had been scammed. 
• Another recent case of digital arrest fraud came from Faridabad. Where a 23-year-old girl got a call from a fraudster posing as a Lucknow customs officer. The caller said that a package was being shipped to Cambodia that included cards and passports associated with the victim's Aadhaar number. The victim was forced to believe that she was a part of illegal activity, which included trafficking in humans. Under the guise of police officials, the hackers made up allegations before extorting money from the victim. After that, she was told by a man acting as a CBI official that she needed to pay five per cent of the total which was Rs 15 lakh. She said the cybercriminals instructed her not to log off Skype. In the meantime, she ended up transferring Rs 2.5 lakh to a bank account shared by cybercriminals. 

Measures to protect oneself from digital arrest

Sustaining a practical and observant approach towards cybersecurity is the key to lowering the peril of being targeted and experiencing digital arrest. Following are certain best practices for ensuring the same:

• Cyber Hygiene: This includes maintaining cyber hygiene by regularly updating passwords, and software and also enabling two-factor authentications to reduce the chances of unauthorized access.

• Phishing Attempts: These can be evaded by refraining from clicking on dubious links or downloading attachments from unknown sources and also authenticating the legitimacy of emails and messages before sharing any personal information.

• Secured devices: By installing reputable antivirus and anti-malware solutions and keeping operating systems and applications up to date with the latest security protocols.

• Virtual Private Networks (VPNs): VPNs can be employed to encrypt internet connections thus enhancing privacy and security. However one must be cautious of free VPN services and OTP only for trustworthy providers.  

• Monitor online services: A regular review of online accounts for any unauthorized or unlawful activities and setting up alerts for any changes to account settings or login attempts may help in the early detection of cybercrime and coping with it.

• Secure communication channels: Using secure communication techniques such as encryption can be done for the protection of sensitive information. Sharing of passwords and other information must be cautiously done especially in public forums.

• Awareness: The increasing prevalence of cybercrime known as "digital arrest" underscores the need for preventive measures and increased public awareness. Educational initiatives that draw attention to prevalent cyber threats—especially those that include law enforcement impersonation—can enable people to identify and fend off scams of this kind. The collaboration of law enforcement agencies and telecommunication companies can effectively limit the access points used by fraudsters by identifying and blocking susceptible calls.

Conclusion

The rise of Digital Arrest presents a noteworthy and innovative threat to cybersecurity by taking advantage of people's weaknesses through deceitful impersonation and coercive measures. The case in Noida is a prime example of the boldness and skill of cybercriminals who use fear and false information to trick victims into thinking they are in danger of suffering harsh legal repercussions and taking large amounts of money. In order to combat this increasing cybercrime, people need to take a proactive and watchful stance when it comes to cybersecurity. Cyber hygiene techniques, such as two-factor authentication and frequent password changes, are essential for lowering the possibility of unwanted access. Important precautions include being aware of phishing efforts, protecting devices with reliable antivirus software, and using Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) to increase privacy. Cybercriminals and fraudsters often use fear as a powerful tool to manipulate people and exploit their vulnerabilities for illicit gains in the realms of cybercrime and financial fraud. To protect themselves against the sneaky threat of Digital Arrest, netizens must traverse the constantly changing cyber threat landscape with collective knowledge, educated practices, and strong cybersecurity measures. 

References:

1. https://www.business-standard.com/india-news/new-cyber-crime-trend-unravelled-in-up-woman-held-under-digital-arrest-123120200485_1.html
2. https://www.businessinsider.in/india/news/noida-woman-scammed-11-lakh-in-digital-arrest-scam-everything-you-need-to-know/articleshow/105727970.cms
3. https://m.timesofindia.com/life-style/parenting/moments/23-year-old-faridabad-girl-on-digital-arrest-for-17-days-how-to-protect-your-children-from-cyber-crime/photostory/105442556.cms

Executive Summary:

A viral video has circulated on social media, wrongly showing lawbreakers surrendering to the Indian Army. However, the verification performed shows that the video is of a group surrendering to the Bangladesh Army and is not related to India. The claim that it is related to the Indian Army is false and misleading. 

Claims:

A viral video falsely claims that a group of lawbreakers is surrendering to the Indian Army, linking the footage to recent events in India.

Fact Check:

Upon receiving the viral posts, we analysed the keyframes of the video through Google Lens search. The search directed us to credible news sources in Bangladesh, which confirmed that the video was filmed during a surrender event involving criminals in Bangladesh, not India.

‍

We further verified the video by cross-referencing it with official military and news reports from India. None of the sources supported the claim that the video involved the Indian Army.  Instead, the video was linked to another similar Bangladesh Media covering the news.

‍

No evidence was found in any credible Indian news media outlets that covered the video. The viral video was clearly taken out of context and misrepresented to mislead viewers.

Conclusion:

The viral video claiming to show lawbreakers surrendering to the Indian Army is footage from Bangladesh. The CyberPeace Research Team confirms that the video is falsely attributed to India, misleading the claim.

• Claim: The video shows miscreants surrendering to the Indian Army.  
• Claimed on: Facebook, X, YouTube
• Fact Check: False & Misleading

‍

Introduction

‍

“an intermediary, on whose computer resource the information is stored, hosted or published, upon receiving actual knowledge in the form of an order by a court of competent jurisdiction or on being notified by the Appropriate Government or its agency under clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 79 of the Act, shall not ‍, which is prohibited under any law for the time being in force in relation to the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India; security of the State; friendly relations with foreign States; public order; decency or morality; in relation to contempt of court; defamation; incitement to an offence relating to the above, or any information which is prohibited under any law for the time being in force”

‍

Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals itself through its own gaps. The most recent notification from MeitY, G.S.R. 775(E) dated October 22, 2025, is an illustration of that self-correction. On November 15, 2025, the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2025, will come into effect. They accomplish two crucial things: they restrict who can use "actual knowledge” to initiate takedown and require senior-level scrutiny of those directives. By doing this, they maintain genuine security requirements while guiding India’s content governance system towards more transparent due process. 

‍

When Regulation Learns Restraint

‍

To better understand the jurisprudence of revision, one must need to understand that Regulation, in its truest form, must know when to pause. The 2025 amendment marks that rare moment when the government chooses precision over power, when regulation learns restraint. The amendment revises Rule 3(1)(d) of the 2021 Rules. Social media sites, hosting companies, and other digital intermediaries are still required to take action within 36 hours of receiving “actual knowledge” that a piece of content is illegal (e.g. poses a threat to public order, sovereignty, decency, or morality). However, “actual knowledge” now only occurs in the following situations: 

(i) a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction, or

(ii) a reasoned written intimation from a duly authorised government officer not below Joint Secretary rank (or equivalent)

‍

The authorised authority in matters involving the police “must not be below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG)”. This creates a well defined, senior-accountable channel in place of a diffuse trigger. 

There are two more new structural guardrails. The Rules first establish a monthly assessment of all takedown notifications by a Secretary-level officer of the relevant government to test necessity, proportionality, and compliance with India’s safe harbour provision under Section 79(3) of the IT Act. Second, in order for platforms to act precisely rather than in an expansive manner, takedown requests must be accompanied by legal justification, a description of the illegal act, and precise URLs or identifiers. The cumulative result of these guardrails is that each removal has a proportionality check and a paper trail. 

‍

Due Process as the Law’s Conscience 

‍

Indian jurisprudence has been debating what constitutes “actual knowledge” for over a decade. The Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal (2015) connected an intermediary’s removal obligation to notifications from official channels or court orders rather than vague notice. But over time, that line became hazy due to enforcement practices and some court rulings, raising concerns about over-removal and safe-harbour loss under Section 79(3). Even while more recent decisions questioned the “reasonable efforts” of intermediaries, the 2025 amendment institutionally pays homage to Shreya Singhal’s ethos by refocusing “actual knowledge” on formal reviewable communications from senior state actors or judges. 

The amendment also introduces an internal constitutionalism to executive orders by mandating monthly audits at the Secretary level. The state is required to re-justify its own orders on a rolling basis, evaluating them against proportionality and necessity, which are criteria that Indian courts are increasingly requesting for speech restrictions. Clearer triggers, better logs, and less vague “please remove” communications that previously left compliance teams in legal limbo are the results for intermediaries.

‍

The Court’s Echo in the Amendment

‍

The essence of this amendment is echoed in Karnataka High Court’s Ruling on Sahyog Portal, a government portal used to coordinate takedown orders under Section 79(3)(b), was constitutional. The HC rejected X’s (formerly Twitter’s) appeal contesting the legitimacy of the portal in September. The business had claimed that by giving nodal officers the authority to issue takedown orders without court review, the portal permitted arbitrary content removals. The court disagreed, holding that the officers’ acts were in accordance with Section 79 (3)(b) and that they were “not dropping from the air but emanating from statutes.” The amendment turns compliance into conscience by conforming to the Sahyog Portal verdict, reiterating that due process is the moral grammar of governance rather than just a formality. 

‍

Conclusion: The Necessary Restlessness of Law 

‍

Law cannot afford stillness; it survives through self doubt and reinvention. The 2025 amendment, too, is not a destination, it’s a pause before the next question, a reminder that justice breathes through revision. As befits a constitutional democracy, India’s path to content governance has been combative and iterative. The next rule making cycle has been sharpened by the stays split judgments, and strikes down that have resulted from strategic litigation centred on the IT Rules, safe harbour, government fact-checking, and blocking orders. Lessons learnt are reflected in the 2025 amendment: review triumphs over opacity; specificity triumphs over vagueness; and due process triumphs over discretion. A digital republic balances freedom and force in this way. 

‍

Sources

• https://pressnews.in/law-and-justice/government-notifies-amendments-to-it-rules-2025-strengthening-intermediary-obligations/ 
• https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2025/10/90dedea70a3fdfe6d58efb55b95b4109.pdf 
• https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2181719 
• https://www.scobserver.in/journal/x-relies-on-shreya-singhal-in-arbitrary-content-blocking-case-in-karnataka-hc/ 
• https://www.medianama.com/2025/10/223-content-takedown-rules-online-platforms-36-hr-deadline-officer-rank/#:~:text=It%20specifies%20that%20government%20officers,Deputy%20Inspector%20General%20of%20Police%E2%80%9D.

‍

‍