#FactCheck: Israel Apologizes to Iran’ Video Is AI-Generated

Introduction

‍

The trajectory of India's digital economy is growing at an unprecedented rate, and so is India's cybercrime ecosystem. Parliamentary data tabled before the Rajya Sabha in May 2024 by the MHA suggests an overwhelming 900% growth in cybercrime complaints from 2021 to '25, while annual losses crossed 22,800 crore in 2024. The structural issues like the low victim restitution rate, the lack of forensic infrastructure, issues of jurisdiction related to offshore fraud factories targeting Indian citizens, and the huge disparity in awareness levels amongst India's youngest online citizens continue to exist. This brief brings out the clear trends in cybercrime, the role of institutional mechanisms in its prevention and response, failure points, and recommends appropriate policy interventions from the perspective of CyberPeace.

‍

The Data Imperative

‍

Since its operationalisation in 2019 by the Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), the NCRP serves as India's most significant institutional apparatus for cybercrime reporting and response. Data placed before the Rajya Sabha by the Ministry of Home Affairs on 30 July 2025 show that, with almost no exception, complaints of cybercrime have increased far more quickly than most traditional indicators of public safety. Between 2021 and June 2025, the NCRP received 6.59 million complaints, evidence of both a sustained and escalating expansion of India's cyber threat profile. Complaints per year more than quadrupled from 4.52 lakh in 2021 to 19.18 lakh in 2024 (324% over the period); by 2025, the NCRP had received 28.15 lakh complaints, a 523 percent rise compared with the 2021 baseline:

Clearly, cyber-enabled crime is no longer an occasional crisis but a systemic governance issue requiring consistent regulation and institution-building.

The financial fallout has also accelerated dramatically. Figures indicate that reported financial losses due to cybercrime jumped from 2,290 crore in 2022 to 22,812 crore in 2024 a 895% leap in two years:

‍

‍

Though response mechanisms such as the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS) successfully blocked or recovered close to 8,690 crore as of January 2026, victims appear to get back only about 2.18 percent of the losses they report. 

In most areas, reporting and response have expanded greatly, but both the rate and scale of cyber-enabled financial fraud continue to outstrip India's remediation and law enforcement capacity. 

‍

Threat Typology of India’s Fraud Ecosystem

‍

The nature of cyber crime in India has evolved from an opportunistic volume-based activity to a layered transnational criminal environment. I4C intelligence as tabled in Parliament reveals investment scams as the biggest threat: they accounted for 76% of the financial fraud lost in 2025 (although only 35% of complaints were filed, thus, a very high value per case was lost).

‍

‍

Digital arrest frauds, which tap on citizens' unawareness that "digital arrest" is not permissible under Indian law, rose from 39,925 cases (91 crore) in 2022 to 123,672 cases (1,935crore) in 2024.

‍

‍

The fast rise in the number of incidents as well as in the volume of fraud clearly points out that digital arrest fraud has moved away from the phase of novel scam typology to a formidable cyber-extortion landscape. The main orchestrators of investment, trading, dating, and digital arrest scams targeting Indian citizens were recently identified by the I4C CEO Rajesh Kumar as transnational criminal scam networks in Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos. Hence, this issue does not only fall within the domain of domestic law enforcement but constitutes a transnational cybercrime requiring parallel financial intelligence, diplomatic initiative, platform responsibility, and international investigative collaboration.

‍

‍

‍

Geographic Concentration
‍

Maharashtra and UP register the highest volumes in total complaints at 3.03 lakh and 3.01 lakh, owing to them being the financial capital and most populous state, respectively. Karnataka, Gujarat, Delhi, WB, Telangana, TN, Rajasthan, and Haryana register above 1 lakh complaints each. However, the critical information that is being missed is that while complaint rate growth is the fastest in Tier 2 and 3 geographies (Haryana leads per-capita complaint rate with 381/100k people in 2023; Telangana (261); Uttarakhand (243)), this signifies rural digital growth as a risk multiplier.
‍

Institutional Architecture: Mechanisms and Performances
‍

India's institutional response to cybercrime, led by the Ministry of Home Affairs' Indian Cyber Crime Coordination Centre (I4C), is one of the world's largest real-time fraud detection and prevention ecosystems. The backbone of this is the Citizen Financial Cyber Fraud Reporting and Management System (CFCFRMS), which has onboarded over 700 banks, payment service providers, e-commerce portals, digital wallets, and, since the Standard Operating Procedure was issued on 2nd January 2026, virtual asset service providers and crypto exchanges. This interconnected network allows for prompt freezing of funds and timely fraud intervention during the 'golden hour' of a cybercrime report. 

‍

Institutional capacity is robust, with approximately 8,690 crore saved via the CFCFRMS since its inception for over 24.65 lakh complaints. The national cybercrime helpline (1930) receives close to 10,000 calls daily, while the Suspect Registry has enabled the rejection of 9,519 crore via the detection of 23.05 lakh suspect entities and 27.37 lakh mule accounts. In parallel, the CyTrain platform has expanded training by registering 151,081 police and judicial officers and issuing 142,025 certificates. Cyberforensic labs in all 33 States and Union Territories have received central assistance totalling 132.93 crore, and data-driven interstate crime analytics and offender linkages through the Samanvaya and Pratibimb platforms have led to 21,857 arrests.
‍

Ecosystem Gaps
‍

Through I4C, CFCFRMS, CyTrain, and the establishment of forensic infrastructure in states, India’s cybercrime ecosystem has greatly grown. But due to the rapid proliferation of cybercrime, systemic shortcomings are revealed regarding the restoration of victims, investigation, forensic capacity, cross-border enforcement, awareness, and stakeholder coordination:

• Victim Restitution Deficit: Although the total of ₹ 8,690 crore frozen has increased, the refund for victim compensation is limited to only ₹ 167 crore (2.18%) due to lengthy restoration processes relying on court orders.
• Forensic Capacity Limitations: 2 national, state-level, unevenly equipped cyber forensic labs can’t match the needs of over 10 million cybercrime complaints per year.
• Low conviction rate: The investigations of cybercrimes suffer from evidence collection and criminal proceedings, leading to limited conviction rates.
• Cross-border enforcement challenges: Many of the investment and digital arrest scams, in fact, are originating from Cambodia, Myanmar, and Laos, rendering the cybercrime response mechanisms of India helpless.
• Lack of Awareness: First-time digital users are quite prone to online scams and fraud, and many of the victims continue not reporting due to social stigma and lack of confidence.
• Partial Stakeholder Integration: Banks and small financial institutions, small companies, and emerging virtual asset providers not yet on board allow the money to slip through without being tracked.

CyberPeace Insights: Strategic Way Forward
‍

India has already built a relatively mature response structure for cybercrime with I4C, CFCFRMS, and CyTrain and is coordinating the financial sector on it. The way ahead lies in outcome-oriented improvements and not just in the ability to report and intercept more. Here are the priority interventions that address the most important institutional shortcomings identified in the current ecosystem:

• Fast-track victim restoration: Introduce time-bound victim restoration mechanisms for low-value incidents through simplified processes and mandate national-level roll-out of successful Lok Adalat-based settlement mechanisms.
• District-level cyber forensics: Establish cyber forensic support units at the district level and enhance access to mobile, cloud, and blockchain forensic capabilities.
• AI-powered fraud prevention: Mandate deep-fake and voice-clone detection mechanisms across all financial institutions and telecom networks; embed predictive risk analytics into transaction screening frameworks.
• Cyber Suraksha Gram initiative: Increase digital fraud awareness across all common service centres, Jan Dhan enrollment schemes, and rural banking channels, and tackle the awareness asymmetry.
• Regional cybercrime coordination: Establish real-time, operational intelligence-sharing mechanisms with Southeast Asian economies, which have become home to large scam networks preying on Indian citizens.
• Specialised cyber prosecution ecosystem: Develop exclusive cyber courts, standardise digital evidence procedures, and broaden the scope of CyTrain to include the development of specialised cadres of investigators and prosecutors capable of handling increasingly complex cybercrime cases.

Conclusion
‍

The 22,812 crore lost due to cybercrime in 2024 was more than a mere figure; it signifies a serious concern regarding citizen trust, economic security, and digital inclusion. Though India's institutional response to cybercrime is one of the largest, with an operational I4C and a CFCFRMS functioning in real time, the victim compensation and prosecution mechanism falls short. It's time for implementation: faster recovery of resources, increased enforcement, a larger scale of awareness, and finally, translating the institutional innovations into concrete justice for victims nationwide.

References
‍

1. https://sansad.in/getFile/annex/270/AU1341_tmaxdx.pdf?source=pqars
2. https://www.mha.gov.in/MHA1/Par2017/pdfs/par2025-pdfs/LS02122025/452.pdf
3. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2244504&reg=3&lang=2
4. https://static.pib.gov.in/WriteReadData/specificdocs/documents/2025/oct/doc2025107659501.pdf
5. https://www.medianama.com/2025/08/223-india-cybercrime-500-percent-increase-2021-2024/
6. https://theprint.in/india/cybercrime-saw-24-spike-in-2025-indians-lost-rs-22495-crore-mainly-in-investment-scams/2859930/

‍

‍

Introduction

The role of ‘Small and Medium Enterprises’ (SMEs) in the economic and social development of the country is well established. The SME sector is often driven by individual creativity and innovation. With its contribution at  8% of the country’s GDP, and 45% of the manufactured output and 40% of its exports, SMEs provide employment to about 60 million persons through over 26 million enterprises producing over six thousand products. 

It would be an understatement to say that the SMEs sector in India is highly heterogeneous in terms of the size of the enterprises, variety of products and services produced and the levels of technology employed. With the SME sector booming across the country, these enterprises are contributing significantly to local, state, regional and national growth and feeding into India’s objectives of inclusive, sustainable development. 

As the digital economy expands, SMEs cannot be left behind and must integrate online to be able to grow and prosper. This development is not without its risks and cybersecurity concerns and digital threats like misinformation are fast becoming a pressing pain point for the SME sector. The unique challenge posed to SMEs by cyber threats is that while the negative consequences of digital risks are just as damaging for the SMEs as they are for larger industries, the former’s ability to counter these threats is not at par with the latter, owing to the limited nature of resources at their disposal. The rapid development of emerging technologies like artificial intelligence makes it easier for malicious actors to develop bots, deepfakes, or other forms of manipulated content that can steer customers away from small businesses and the consequences can be devastating. 

Misinformation is the sharing of inaccurate and misleading information, and the act can be both deliberate and unintentional. Malicious actors can use fake reviews, rumours, or false images to promote negative content or create backlash against a business’ brand and reputation. For a fledgling or growing enterprise, its credibility is a critical asset and any threat to the same is as much a cause for concern as any other operational hindrance. 

Relationship Building to Counter Misinformation

We live in a world that is dominated by brands. A brand should ideally inspire trust. It is the single most powerful and unifying characteristic that embodies an organisation's culture and values and once well-established, can create incremental value. Businesses report industry rumours where misinformation resulted in the devaluation of a product, sowing mistrust among customers, and negatively impacting the companies’ revenue. Mitigating strategies to counter these digital downsides can include implementing greater due diligence and basic cyber hygiene practices, like two-factor or multi-factor authentication, as well as open communication of one’s experiences in the larger professional and business networks. 

The loss of customer trust can be fatal for a business, and for an SME, the access to the scale of digital and other resources required to restore reputations may simply not be a feasible option. Creating your brand story is not just the selling pitch you give to customers and investors, but is also about larger qualitative factors such as your own motivation for starting the enterprise or the emotional connection your audience base enjoys with your organisation. The brand story is a mosaic of multiple tangible and intangible elements that all come together to determine how the brand is perceived by its various stakeholders. Building a compelling and fortified brand story which resonates deeply with people is an important step in developing a robust reputation. It can help innoculate against several degrees of misinformation and malicious attempts and ensure that customers continue to place their faith in the brand despite attempts to hurt this dynamic.

Engaging with the target audience, ie, the customer base is part of an effective marketing tool and misinformation inoculation strategy. SMEs should also continuously assess their strategies, adapt to market changes, and remain agile in their approach to stay competitive and relevant in today's dynamic business environment. These strategies will lead to greater customer engagement through the means of feedback, reviews and surveys which help in building trust and loyalty. Innovative and dynamic customer service engages the target audience and helps in staying in the competition and being relevant.

Crisis Management and Response

Having a crisis management strategy is an important practice for all SMEs and should be mandated for better policy implementation. Businesses need greater due diligence and basic cyber hygiene practices, like two-factor authentication, essential compliances, strong password protocols, transparent disclosure, etc. 

The following steps should form part of a crisis management and response strategy:

• Assessing the damage by identifying the misinformation spread and its impact is the first step.  
• Issuing a response in the form of a public statement by engaging the media should precede legal action. 
• Two levels of communication need to take place in response to a misinformation attack. The first tier is internal, to the employees and it should clarify the implications of the incident and the organisation’s response plan. The other is aimed at customers via direct outreach to clarify the situation and provide accurate information in regard to the matter.  If required the employees can be provided training related to the handling of the customer enquiries regarding the misinformation.
• The digital engagement of the enterprise should be promptly updated and social media platforms and online communications must address the issue and provide clarity and factual information. 
• Immediate action must include a plan to rebuild reputations and trust by ensuring customers of the high quality of products and services. The management should seek customer feedback and show commitment to improving processes and transparency. Sharing positive testimonials and stories of satisfied customers can also help at this stage. 
• Engaging with the community and collaborating with organisations is also an important part of crisis management.

While these steps are for rebuilding and crisis management, further steps also need to be taken:

• Monitoring customer sentiment and gauging the effectiveness of the efforts taken is also necessary. And if required, strategic adjustments can be made in response to the evolving circumstances. 
• Depending on the severity of the impact, management may choose to engage the professional help of PR consultants and crisis management experts to develop comprehensive recovery plans and help navigate the situation.
• A long-term strategy which focuses on building resilience against future attacks is important. Along with this, engaging in transparency and proactive communication with stakeholders is a must.

Legal and Ethical Considerations

SMEs administrators must prioritise ethical market practices and appreciate that SMEs are subject to laws which deal with defamation, intellectual property rights- trademark and copyright infringement in particular, data protection and privacy laws and consumer protection laws. Having the knowledge of these laws and ensuring that there is no infringement upon the rights of other enterprises or their consumers is integral in order to continue engaging in business legally. 

Ethical and transparent business conduct includes clear and honest communication and proactive public redressal mechanisms in the event of misinformation or mistakes. These efforts go a long way towards building trust and accountability. 

Proactive public engagement is an important step in building relationships. SMEs can engage with the community where they conduct their business through outreach programs and social media engagement. Efforts to counter misinformation through public education campaigns that alert customers and other stakeholders about misinformation serve the dual purpose of countering misinformation and creating deep community ties. SME administrators should monitor content and developments in their markets and sectors to ensure that their marketing practices are ethical and not creating or spreading misinformation, be it in the form of active sensationalising of existing content or passive dissemination of misinformation created by others. Fact-checking tools and expert consultations can help address and prevent a myriad of problems and should be incorporated into everyday operations.

Conclusion

Developing strong cybersecurity protocols, practising basic digital hygiene and ensuring regulatory compliances are crucial to ensure that a business not only survives but also thrives. Therefore, a crisis management plan and trust-building along with ethical business and legal practices go a long way in ensuring the future of SMEs.  In today's digital landscape, misinformation is pervasive, and trust has become a cornerstone of successful business operations. It is the bedrock of a resilient and successful SME. By implementing and continuously improving trust-building efforts, businesses can not only navigate the challenges of misinformation but also create lasting value for their customers and stakeholders. Prioritising trust ensures long-term growth and sustainability in an ever-evolving digital landscape.

References 

• https://SME.gov.in/sites/default/files/SME-Strategic-Action-Plan.pdf 
• https://carnegieendowment.org/research/2024/01/countering-disinformation-effectively-an-evidence-based-policy-guide?lang=en 
• https://dcSME.gov.in/Report%20of%20Expert%20Committee%20on%20SMEs%20-%20The%20U%20K%20Sinha%20Committee%20constitutes%20by%20RBI.pdf 

‍

Executive Summary

‍

Misleading claims related to an incident in Delhi are being widely circulated on social media. Several posts allege that an Indian Army brigadier and his son were assaulted while returning from a “dance club party.” The posts further claim that the attack was triggered by remarks related to “Operation Sindoor.” However, research by the CyberPeace found that these claims are completely false and fabricated.

‍

Claim

‍

On social media platform X, some users (including @ManipurPost5) shared posts claiming that an Indian Army brigadier and his son were attacked after returning from a dance club. The posts also alleged that the altercation escalated after someone mocked “Operation Sindoor.”

• https://x.com/ManipurPost5 

‍

Fact check

‍

To verify the claim, we conducted keyword searches on Google and found a report published by Republic World on April 14, 2026, which included visuals similar to those being circulated.

• https://www.republicworld.com/india/two-arrested-after-army-brigadier-and-son-assaulted-for-opposing-public-drinking-in-delhi 

‍

According to the report, the victims were identified as Brigadier Parminder Singh Arora, a serving Indian Army officer, and his son Tejas Arora. At the time of the incident, they were taking a walk near their residence after dinner. Reports state that they noticed a group of individuals consuming alcohol inside a parked car in a public place and objected to it. This led to an argument, which later escalated into a violent assault. Around 7–8 individuals allegedly attacked the brigadier and his son, with the son sustaining more serious injuries. Questions have also been raised about the role of police personnel present at the scene. Following the complaint, a case was registered, one police constable was suspended, and two accused individuals have been arrested so far. The vehicle involved has also been seized. Further verification led us to another report published by India Today on April 14, 2026, which corroborated the same details of the incident.
‍

• https://www.indiatoday.in/cities/delhi/story/brigadier-and-son-thrashed-in-delhi-after-objecting-to-drinking-alcohol-in-car-crime-news-indian-army-2895732-2026-04-14

‍

‍

Conclusion

‍

The viral claim is misleading and entirely false.The incident has no connection to any “dance club party” or to “Operation Sindoor.” In reality, the altercation began after the brigadier objected to public drinking near his residence.

‍