Centre Proposes New Bills for Criminal Law

Introduction

‍

The digital ecosystem has undergone a profound transformation due to the rapid growth of artificial intelligence, especially through its generative applications. While this progress has introduced innovative technologies, it has also intensified the risks of deepfakes, misinformation, and identity theft. The Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2026, introduced by the Government of India, mark an important step toward stronger digital governance and greater oversight of online activities. These latest amendments establish new regulatory standards and represent India’s most comprehensive effort so far to address synthetically generated information, including AI created audio, video, and images that closely imitate reality.

‍

Understanding the Core Shift: From Reactive to Proactive Regulation

‍

The 2026 amendment establishes its main characteristic through its shift from a reactive compliance system to a proactive due diligence system. Intermediaries must now operate as active participants who take responsibility for detecting, marking and controlling dangerous material instead of functioning as neutral channels.  The rules establish an official definition for stands for Synthetically Generated Information(SGI), which they protect through legal regulations, while they address issues such as impersonation scams, election manipulation and non-consensual deepfake content.  The current transition represents a worldwide pattern that shows that governments are starting to make online platforms responsible for the material they display.

‍

Key Provisions of the IT Amendment Rules, 2026

‍

1. Mandatory Labelling of AI-Generated Content 

‍

Platforms must ensure that all AI-generated content is clearly labelled or watermarked to distinguish it from authentic media. Users must reveal their uploaded content's synthetic origin while platforms must confirm the information.

‍

2. The 3-Hour Takedown Rule

‍

The most contentious aspect of this regulation establishes new rules that require content removal to be processed within much shorter timeframes.:

‍

• The government and courts grant three-hour time limits for removing unlawful content.
• The two-hour deadline applies to media that includes non-consensual intimate imagery.

‍

The current time frame allows content removal within three hours, which represents a major decrease from the previous content removal time, which lasted between 24 and 36 hours, because online misinformation needs urgent attention.

‍

3. Traceability and Metadata Requirements

‍

The rules require AI-generated content to include both digital fingerprints and metadata, which enables traceability and accountability through their embedded digital fingerprints. The provision serves as an essential tool for law enforcement to investigate cases while it helps identify which parties generated harmful content.

‍

4. Safe Harbour Conditionality

‍

Intermediaries who do not meet the following three conditions risk losing their safe harbour protection through Section 79 of the IT Act:

‍

• The first requirement demands that intermediaries must implement proper labelling. 
• The second requirement demands that intermediaries must complete their takedown responsibilities within specific timeframes 
• The third requirement demands that intermediaries must complete their due diligence tasks. 

‍

This development represents a major transition for digital platforms, which will face increased responsibility for their actions.

‍

5. Strengthened Grievance Redressal

‍

The amendment establishes two new requirements for platforms. The amendment requires platforms to create systems that operate at all times to monitor their compliance with regulations.

‍

Significance: Why These Rules Matter

‍

The 2026 amendments are significant for multiple reasons:

‍

• The rules require labelling and rapid content removal, which helps to stop the viral dissemination of misleading information.
• The framework provides better identity protection, defamation defence and protection against non-consensual imagery.
• The new rules make intermediaries responsible for their own compliance failures.
• The regulation of AI-generated misinformation protects democratic processes during electoral periods and public discussions.

‍

The rules demonstrate India's goal to establish international standards for AI governance and digital responsibility.

‍

Challenges and Concerns

‍

The amendments present key issues that exist despite their positive aspects:

‍

• The process of removing content at high speed creates risks for legitimate expression because safeguards need to be established through careful planning. 
• The technical and infrastructural requirements governing compliance create financial burdens for smaller platforms that operate as intermediaries. 

‍

The existing challenges demonstrate the necessity for a solution that protects both human rights and security needs.

‍

Conclusion

‍

The IT Amendment Rules, 2026, establish a critical turning point for India's progress toward digital governance. The framework aims to establish a more secure digital environment through its solution of AI-generated content and deepfake detection problems, which create transparency and accountability issues. The rules will achieve their goals through proper implementation, which requires creating quick enforcement methods that protect both legal processes and free speech rights. The ongoing development of AI technology requires regulatory systems to keep changing while including all citizens and upholding democratic principles. 

‍

References

‍

• https://vajiramandravi.com/current-affairs/it-rules-amendment-2026
• https://indianexpress.com/article/legal-news/indias-new-3-hour-deepfake-removal-rule-experts-urge-strict-compliance-10528122
• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/governments-new-it-rules-make-ai-content-labelling-mandatory-give-google-youtube-instagram-and-other-platforms-3-hours-for-takedowns/articleshow/128157496.cms
• https://www.drishtiias.com/daily-updates/daily-news-analysis/information-technology-amendment-rules-2026
• https://visionias.in/current-affairs/news-today/2026-02-11/science-and-technology/government-notified-the-information-technology-intermediary-guidelines-and-digital-media-ethics-code-amendment-rules-2026

‍

Executive Summary:

‍

A video is rapidly circulating on social media following claims that Iran’s national security chief Ali Larijani was killed in an Israeli airstrike. The viral clip is being shared with the assertion that it shows the moment Israel launched a powerful attack on Iran to eliminate Larijani, allegedly shaking the ground due to the intensity of the strike However, research by CyberPeace has found the claim to be misleading. The viral video is AI-generated and has no connection to real-world events.

‍

Claim:

‍

Social media users have shared the video with alarming captions. One such post by Deepak Sharma reads:

‍

“WAR UPDATE… Iran is in its final phase… Israel is striking selectively… This attack will leave you shocked… Iran’s national security chief Ali Larijani has been killed in this attack… The intensity of the strike shook the Iranian الأرض.

‍

Post links:

‍

• https://x.com/SonOfBharat7/status/2038814061186748760 
• https://archive.ph/CkWrK
  ‍

‍

‍

Similar videos were also shared by other users:

‍

• urabh_raj3026/status/2038834832869032026
  
• https://x.com/ibmindia20/status/2038938020154597447 
  
• https://x.com/Saurabh_raj3026/status/2038834832869032026 

‍

Fact Check

‍

To verify the claim, we extracted keyframes from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search. During this process, we found the same video on Instagram, uploaded on March 9, 2026, by the account “_iranwar_2026” without any descriptive caption.

‍

• https://www.instagram.com/p/DVrBEiGEiUY/ 

‍

‍

According to a BBC report, Ali Larijani died on March 17 in an Israeli strike. This establishes that the viral video predates the reported incident, making the claim factually inconsistent. Further examination of the Instagram account revealed that it frequently shares pro-Iran content, including gaming visuals and AI-generated clips, raising doubts about the authenticity of the video.

‍

‍

To strengthen the verification, we analyzed the viral clip using the AI detection tool “Zhuque AI Detection Assistant.” The results indicated a 91.71% probability that the video is AI-generated, confirming that it is not real footage.

‍

‍

Conclusion 

‍

The viral claim linking the video to an Israeli airstrike that allegedly killed Ali Larijani is misleading and factually incorrect. Multiple layers of verification show that the video existed online before the reported incident, ruling out any direct connection. Additionally, AI detection analysis strongly suggests that the video is artificially generated. The source account’s pattern of sharing AI and gaming-related content further weakens the credibility of the claim. There is no verified evidence to support that the viral clip depicts a real attack or any event related to Larijani’s death. Instead, the video appears to be a digitally created visual circulated without context to amplify misinformation.

‍

Introduction

On 20th March 2024, the Indian government notified the Fact Check Unit (FCU) under the Press Information Bureau (PIB) of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as the Fact Check Unit (FCU) of the Central Government. This PIB FCU is notified under the provisions of Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules 2023 (IT Amendment Rules 2023).

However, the next day, on 21st March 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the Centre's decision. The IT Amendment Rules of 2023 provide that the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) can notify a fact-checking body to identify and tag what it considers fake news with respect to any activity of the Centre. The stay will be in effect till the Bombay High Court finally decides the challenges to the IT Rules amendment 2023.

The official notification dated 20th March 2024 read as follows:

“In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-clause (v) of clause (b) of sub-rule (1) of rule 3 of the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021, the Central Government hereby notifies the Fact Check Unit under the Press Information Bureau of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting as the fact check unit of the Central Government for the purposes of the said sub-clause, in respect of any business of the Central Government.”

Impact of the notification

The impact of notifying PIB’s FCU under Rule 3(1)(b)(v)will empower the PIB’s FCU to issue direct takedown directions to the concerned Intermediary. Any information posted on social media in relation to the business of the central government that has been flagged as fake or false by the FCU has to be taken down by the concerned intermediary. If it fails to do so, it will lose the 'safe harbour' immunity against legal proceedings arising out of such information posted offered under Section 79 of IT Act, 2000.

Safe harbour provision u/s 79 of IT Act, 2000

Section 79 of the IT Act, 2000 serves as a safe harbour provision for intermediaries. The provision states that "an intermediary shall not be liable for any third-party information, data, or communication link made available or hosted by him". However, it is notable that this legal immunity cannot be granted if the intermediary "fails to expeditiously" take down a post or remove a particular content after the government or its agencies flag that the information is being used unlawfully. Furthermore, intermediaries are obliged to observe due diligence on their platforms.

Rule 3 (1)(b)(v) Under IT Amendment Rules 2023

Rule 3(1)(b)(v) of The Information Technology(Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 [updated as on 6.4.2023] provides that all intermediaries [Including a social media intermediary, a significant social media intermediary and an online gaming intermediary], are required to make "reasonable efforts” or perform due diligence to ensure that their users do not "host, display, upload, modify, publish, transmit, store, update or share” any information that “deceives or misleads the addressee about the origin of the message or knowingly and intentionally communicates any misinformation or information which is patently false and untrue or misleading in nature or, in respect of any business of the Central Government, is identified as fake or false or misleading by such fact check unit of the Central Government as the Ministry may, by notification published in the Official Gazette, specify”.

PIB - FCU

The PIB - Fact Check Unit(FCU) was established in November 2019 to prevent the spread of fake news and misinformation about the Indian government. It also provides an accessible platform for people to report suspicious or questionable information related to the Indian government. This FCU is responsible for countering misinformation on government policies, initiatives, and schemes. The FCU is tasked with addressing misinformation about government policies, initiatives, and schemes, either directly (Suo moto) or through complaints received. On 20th March 2024,via a gazetted notification, the Centre notified the Press Information Bureau's fact-check unit (FCU) as the nodal agency to flag fake news or misinformation related to the central government. However, The Supreme Court stayed the Centre's notification of the Fact-Check Unit under IT Amendment Rules 2023.

Concerns with IT Amendment Rules 2023

The Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology(MeitY) amended the IT Rules of 2021. The ‘Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2023’ (IT Amendment Rules 2023) were notified by the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology on 6 April 2023. The rules introduced new provisions to establish a fact-checking unit with respect to “any business of the central government” and also made other provisions pertaining to online gaming.

The Constitutional validity of  IT Amendment Rules 2023 has been challenged through a writ petition challenging the IT Rules 2023 in the Bombay High Court. The contention is that the rules raise "serious constitutional questions," and Rule 3(1)(b)(v), as amended in 2023, impacts the fundamental right to freedom of speech and expression would fall for analysis by the High Court.

Supreme Court Stays Setting up of FCU

A bench comprising Chief Justice DY Chandra Hud, Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra convened to hear Special Leave Petitions filed by Kunal Kamra, the Editors Guild of India and the Association of Indian Magazines challenging the refusal of the Bombay High Court to stay the implementation of the IT Rules 2023. The Supreme Court has stayed the Union's notification of the Fact-Check Unit under the IT Amendment Rules 2023, pending the Bombay High Court's decision on the challenges to the IT Rules Amendment 2023.

Emphasizing Freedom of Speech in the Democratic Environment

The advent of advanced technology has also brought with it a new generation of threats and concerns: the misuse of said technology in the form of deepfakes and misinformation is one of the most pressing concerns plaguing society today. This realization has informed the critical need for stringent regulatory measures. The government is rightly prioritizing the need to immediately address digital threats, but there must be a balance between our digital security policies and the need to respect free speech and critical thinking. The culture of open dialogue is the bedrock of democracy. The ultimate truth is shaped through free trade in ideas within a competitive marketplace of ideas. The constitutional scheme of democracy places great importance on the fundamental value of liberty of thought and expression, which has also been emphasized by the Supreme Court in its various judgements.

The IT Rules, 2023,provide for creating a "fact check unit" to identify fake or false or misleading information “in relation to any business of the central government "This move raised concerns within the media fraternity, who argued that the determination of fake news cannot be placed solely in the hands of the government. It is also worth noting that if users post something illegal, they can still be punished under laws that already exist in the country.

We must take into account that freedom of speech under Article 19 of the Constitution is not an absolute right. Article 19(2) imposes restrictions on the Right to Freedom of Speech and expression. Hence, there has to be a balance between regulatory measures and citizens' fundamental rights.

Nowadays, the term ‘fake news’ is used very loosely. Additionally, there is a dearth of clearly established legal parameters that define what amounts to fake or misleading information. Clear definitions of the terms should be established to facilitate certainty as to what content is ‘fake news’ and what content is not. Any such restriction on speech must align with the exceptions outlined in Article19(2) of the Constitution.

Conclusion

Through a government notification, PIB - FCU was intended to act as a government-run fact-checking body to verify any information about the Central Government. However, the apex court of India stayed the Centre's notification. Now, the matter is sub judice, and we hope for the judicial analysis of the validity of IT Amendment Rules 2023.

Notably, the government is implementing measures to combat misinformation in the digital world, but it is imperative that we strive for a balance between regulatory checks and individual rights. As misinformation spreads across all sectors, a centralised approach is needed in order to tackle it effectively. Regulatory reforms must take into account the crucial roleplayed by social media in today’s business market: a huge amount of trade and commerce takes place online or is informed by digital content, which means that the government must introduce policies and mechanisms that continue to support economic activity. Collaborative efforts between the government and its agencies, technological companies, and advocacy groups are needed to deal with the issue better at a higher level.

References

• https://egazette.gov.in/(S(xzwt4b4haaqja32xqdiksbju))/ViewPDF.aspx
• https://pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2015792
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/tech/technology/govt-notifies-fact-checking-unit-under-pib-to-check-fake-news-misinformation-related-to-centre/articleshow/108653787.cms?from=mdr
• https://www.epw.in/journal/2023/43/commentary/it-amendment-rules-2023.html#:~:text=The%20Information%20Technology%20Amendment%20Rules,to%20be%20false%20or%20misleading
• ‍https://www.livelaw.in/amp/top-stories/supreme-court-kunal-kamra-editors-guild-notifying-fact-check-unit-it-rules-2023-252998
• ‍https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/3/21/india-top-court-stays-government-move-to-form-fact-check-unit-under-it-laws
• ‍https://www.meity.gov.in/writereaddata/files/Information%20Technology 28Intermediary%20Guidelines%20and%20Digital% 20Media%20Ethics%20Code%29%20Rules%2C%202021%20%28updated%2006.04.2023%29-.pdf
• 2024 SCC On Line Bom 360

‍