#FactCheck-RBI's Alleged Guidelines on Ink Colour for Cheque Writing
Executive Summary:
A viral message is circulating claiming the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has banned the use of black ink for writing cheques. This information is incorrect. The RBI has not issued any such directive, and cheques written in black ink remain valid and acceptable.
Claim:
The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has issued new guidelines prohibiting using black ink for writing cheques. As per the claimed directive, cheques must now be written exclusively in blue or green ink.
Fact Check:
Upon thorough verification, it has been confirmed that the claim regarding the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) issuing a directive banning the use of black ink for writing cheques is entirely false. No such notification, guideline, or instruction has been released by the RBI in this regard. Cheques written in black ink remain valid, and the public is advised to disregard such unverified messages and rely only on official communications for accurate information.
As stated by the Press Information Bureau (PIB), this claim is false The Reserve Bank of India has not prescribed specific ink colors to be used for writing cheques. There is a mention of the color of ink to be used in point number 8, which discusses the care customers should take while writing cheques.
Conclusion:
The claim that the Reserve Bank of India has banned the use of black ink for writing cheques is completely false. No such directive, rule, or guideline has been issued by the RBI. Cheques written in black ink are valid and acceptable. The RBI has not prescribed any specific ink color for writing cheques, and the public is advised to disregard unverified messages. While general precautions for filling out cheques are mentioned in RBI advisories, there is no restriction on the color of the ink. Always refer to official sources for accurate information.
- Claim: The new RBI ink guidelines are mandatory from a specified date.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
A video is being widely shared on social media and linked to protests that allegedly took place in Lucknow after the reported killing of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.Users claim that police in the capital of Uttar Pradesh baton-charged people who were protesting against the United States and Israel. The video is being widely circulated across social media platforms with this claim. However, research by CyberPeace found the claim to be false. Our verification revealed that the video is not from Lucknow but from Bareilly, and it is related to an incident that took place on September 26, 2025, when Uttar Pradesh Police baton-charged protesters during a rally held in support of the “I Love Mohammad” campaign.
Claim Post:
On March 3, 2026, an X (formerly Twitter) user shared the viral video claiming that the Uttar Pradesh Police took action against people blocking roads in Lucknow and creating unrest in support of Ali Khamenei.
Fact Check
To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. During the search, we found a similar video posted on Instagram on September 26, 2025, indicating that the footage predates the current claim.
Further research led us to the same video on the website of Aaj Tak, where it was published on September 26, 2025.
According to the report, protests erupted in Bareilly after Friday prayers over a controversy related to “I Love Mohammad” posters. Hundreds of people took to the streets carrying banners and posters. The report further stated that protesters, responding to a call by cleric Maulana Tauqeer Raza, attempted to break police barricades and move forward. Police initially tried to persuade the crowd to disperse, but when the situation escalated and the crowd refused to back down, officers resorted to baton-charging to control the situation. The incident reportedly led to tension in the area.
Conclusion:
Our research found that the viral video being shared as police action on protesters in Lucknow after the alleged killing of Ali Khamenei is misleading. The footage is actually from Bareilly and shows a police baton-charge during a protest rally held on September 26, 2025 in support of the “I Love Mohammad” campaign.
Introduction
Misinformation in India has emerged as a significant societal challenge, wielding a potent influence on public perception, political discourse, and social dynamics. A potential number of first-time voters across India identified fake news as a real problem in the nation. With the widespread adoption of digital platforms, false narratives, manipulated content, and fake news have found fertile ground to spread unchecked information and news.
In the backdrop of India being the largest market of WhatsApp users, who forward more content on chats than anywhere else, the practice of fact-checking forwarded information continues to remain low. The heavy reliance on print media, television, unreliable news channels and primarily, social media platforms acts as a catalyst since studies reveal that most Indians trust any content forwarded by family and friends. It is noted that out of all risks, misinformation and disinformation ranked the highest in India, coming before infectious diseases, illicit economic activity, inequality and labour shortages. World Economic Forum analysts, in connection with their 2024 Global Risk Report, note that “misinformation and disinformation in electoral processes could seriously destabilise the real and perceived legitimacy of newly elected governments, risking political unrest, violence and terrorism and long-term erosion of democratic processes.”
The Supreme Court of India on Misinformation
The Supreme Court of India, through various judgements, has noted the impact of misinformation on democratic processes within the country, especially during elections and voting. In 1995, while adjudicating a matter pertaining to keeping the broadcasting media under the control of the public, it noted that democracy becomes a farce when the medium of information is monopolized either by partisan central authority or by private individuals or oligarchic organizations.
In 2003, the Court stated that “Right to participate by casting a vote at the time of election would be meaningless unless the voters are well informed about all sides of the issue in respect of which they are called upon to express their views by casting their votes. Disinformation, misinformation, non-information all equally create an uninformed citizenry which would finally make democracy a mobocracy and a farce.” It noted that elections would be a useless procedure if voters remained unaware of the antecedents of the candidates contesting elections. Thus, a necessary aspect of a voter’s duty to cast intelligent and rational votes is being well-informed. Such information forms one facet of the fundamental right under Article 19 (1)(a) pertaining to freedom of speech and expression. Quoting James Madison, it stated that a citizen’s right to know the true facts about their country’s administration is one of the pillars of a democratic State.
On a similar note, the Supreme Court, while discussing the disclosure of information by an election candidate, gave weightage to the High Court of Bombay‘s opinion on the matter, which opined that non-disclosure of information resulted in misinformation and disinformation, thereby influencing voters to take uninformed decisions. It stated that a voter had the elementary right to know the full particulars of a candidate who is to represent him in Parliament/Assemblies.
While misinformation was discussed primarily in relation to elections, the effects of misinformation in other sectors have also been discussed from time to time. In particular, The court highlighted the World Health Organisation’s observation in 2021 while discussing the spread of COVID-19, noting that the pandemic was not only an epidemic but also an “infodemic” due to the overabundance of information on the internet, which was riddled with misinformation and disinformation. While condemning governments’ direct or indirect threats of prosecution to citizens, it noted that various citizens who relied on the internet to provide help in securing medical facilities and oxygen tanks were being targeted by alleging that the information posted by them was false and was posted to create panic, defame the administration or damage national image. It instructed authorities to cease such threats and prevent clampdown on information sharing.
More recently, in Facebook v. Delhi Legislative Assembly [(2022) 3 SCC 529], the apex court, while upholding the summons issued to Facebook by the Delhi Legislative Assembly in the aftermath of the 2020 Delhi Riots, noted that while social media enables equal and open dialogue between citizens and policymakers, it is also a tool in the where extremist views are peddled into mainstream media, thereby spreading misinformation. It noted Facebook’s role in the Mynmar, where misinformation and posts that Facebook employees missed fueled offline violence. Since Facebook is one of the most popular social media applications, the platform itself acts as a power center by hosting various opinions and voices on its forum. This directly impacts the governance of States, and some form of liability must be attached to the platform. The Supreme Court objected to Facebook taking contrary stands in various jurisdictions; while in the US, it projected itself as a publisher, which enabled it to maintain control over the material disseminated from its platform, while in India, “it has chosen to identify itself purely as a social media platform, despite its similar functions and services in the two countries.”
Conclusion
The pervasive issue of misinformation in India is a multifaceted challenge with profound implications for democratic processes, public awareness, and social harmony. The alarming statistics of fake news recognition among first-time voters, coupled with a lack of awareness regarding fact-checking organizations, underscore the urgency of addressing this issue. The Supreme Court of India has consistently recognized the detrimental impact of misinformation, particularly in elections. The judiciary has stressed the pivotal role of an informed citizenry in upholding the essence of democracy. It has emphasized the right to access accurate information as a fundamental aspect of freedom of speech and expression. As India grapples with the challenges of misinformation, the intersection of technology, media literacy and legal frameworks will be crucial in mitigating the adverse effects and fostering a more resilient and informed society.
References
- https://thewire.in/media/survey-finds-false-information-risk-highest-in-india
- https://www.statista.com/topics/5846/fake-news-in-india/#topicOverview
- https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2024/digest/
- https://main.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2020/20428/20428_2020_37_1501_28386_Judgement_08-Jul-2021.pdf
- Secretary, Ministry of Information & Broadcasting, Govt, of India and Others v. Cricket Association of Bengal and Another [(1995) 2 SCC 161]
- People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) v. Union of India [(2003) 4 SCC 399]
- Kisan Shankar Kathore v. Arun Dattatray Sawant and Others [(2014) 14 SCC 162]
- Distribution of Essential Supplies & Services During Pandemic, In re [(2021) 18 SCC 201]
- Facebook v. Delhi Legislative Assembly [(2022) 3 SCC 529]
Amid reports that the death toll in Iran’s ongoing protests has risen to 2,571, a video has been widely circulated on social media showing a man slapping a person dressed in clerical attire after an argument. Users sharing the clip claim that public anger in Iran has escalated to the point where people are now physically attacking religious clerics. However, research by the Cyber Peace Foundation has found this claim to be misleading. The research established that the video is not recent and has no connection to the current protests in Iran. In fact, the clip dates back to 2021 and was entirely scripted.
Claim
On January 14, 2026, users on X (formerly Twitter) shared the viral video with captions suggesting that Iranian citizens are openly assaulting clerics amid the ongoing unrest. One such post stated that the situation in Iran had deteriorated so badly that people were now beating religious leaders.
The link, archived version, and screenshot of the post are available below:
Factcheck:
To verify the authenticity of the claim, the Cyber Peace Foundation extracted keyframes from the viral video and conducted a Google reverse image search. This led investigators to a report published on April 19, 2021, on the Persian-language website of Deutsche Welle (DW). The visuals matched the viral clip exactly, confirming that the footage is nearly five years old, not recent. Here is the link to the original video, along with a screenshot:
Further examination of reports by Fars News Agency revealed that Tehran police had conducted a detailed probe into the video at the time and declared it fake and pre-scripted. According to Tehran Police Chief Hossein Rahimi, the individual seen wearing religious attire was not a cleric. Here is the link to the original video, along with a screenshot: He was actually employed at a carpet cleaning shop in Tehran, while the man seen slapping him was his own son.
Police stated that the video was deliberately staged and circulated to provoke public sentiment and create unrest by falsely linking it to religious tensions. Both the father and son were arrested, and images of them in police custody were published in contemporaneous reports. Additional confirmation was found on the Independent Persian website, which had also reported on the incident on April 19, 2021, reiterating that the video was fabricated and unrelated to any protest movement. Here is the link to the original video, along with a screenshot:
Conclusion
The claim that the viral video shows an Iranian protester slapping a cleric during the current wave of protests is false. The video is from 2021, was scripted, and has no link to the ongoing demonstrations in Iran. It is being reshared with a misleading narrative to spread disinformation and inflame public sentiment.c
