#FactCheck-Old Dehradun Video Falsely Shared as Police Assault on Women Protesters at Jantar Mantar
Executive Summary
A video showing a scuffle between a group of women and police personnel is being widely shared on social media with the claim that it shows Delhi Police assaulting women protesters at Jantar Mantar. CyberPeace Research Wing ’s research found the claim to be misleading. The viral video is not from Jantar Mantar in Delhi but from an unrelated incident in Dehradun, Uttarakhand. The old footage is being falsely circulated as a recent video from the ongoing protests.
Claim:
A Facebook user shared the viral video claiming that Delhi Police personnel were assaulting women and girls during the protest at Jantar Mantar.
The post link, archive link and screenshot are provided below.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/2864826433884333
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we extracted keyframes from the viral video and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. This led us to the same video uploaded on the Instagram account iamvikasbaliyan on October 15, 2025.
https://www.instagram.com/reels/DP0H_SSE625/
According to the information shared with the post, the incident took place in Mohabbewala, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, after a truck crashed into a house, damaging the property. The homeowner allegedly demanded compensation and, when the issue remained unresolved, attempted to set the truck on fire. When police personnel intervened to stop her, a scuffle broke out between the woman and the police. The viral video captures this incident. In the next stage of the research, we found an ABP News report published on October 15, 2025, carrying the same visuals as the viral video. The report also identified the incident as having occurred in Mohabbewala, Dehradun.
Conclusion:
CyberPeace Research Wing ’s research found the viral claim to be misleading. The video does not show Delhi Police assaulting women protesters at Jantar Mantar. It is an old video from Dehradun, Uttarakhand, showing an unrelated incident that has been falsely linked to the ongoing protests in Delhi.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary:
A video circulating on social media shows a group of people tearing Congress posters and raising controversial slogans. The clip is being shared with the claim that the individuals seen in the video are workers of the Congress party who were protesting against Rahul Gandhi and raising slogans against him. However, research by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be misleading. Our research revealed that the video dates back to February 21, 2026. On that day, members of the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha (BJYM) staged a protest outside a Congress office. During the demonstration, they raised slogans and tore Congress posters. The same video is now being circulated with a false narrative.
Claim
On February 24, 2026, a Facebook user shared the viral video with the caption:“Rebellion against Rahul Gandhi in Congress’ own stronghold! Party workers themselves tore posters and raised slogans — ‘Rahul Gandhi is a thief… a thief!’ This video exposes the internal truth of Congress. Congress itself is Muslim League.”
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 the same video uploaded on YouTube on February 21, 2026.
According to the description accompanying the video, BJP workers had staged a protest outside a Congress building. The report mentioned vandalism and stone-pelting during the protest, resulting in injuries to several individuals
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW-13mSvJ2c
Using this lead, we conducted a keyword search on Google and found a report published on February 21, 2026, by the Hindi news website Raj Express. The visuals in the report closely matched those seen in the viral clip.
According to the report, the protest in Bhopal was organized by the Bharatiya Janata Yuva Morcha in response to a T-shirt protest staged by the Youth Congress during an AI Summit held at Bharat Mandapam in New Delhi. The situation escalated when protesters marched toward the state Congress office in Shivaji Nagar. Police attempted to disperse the crowd using water cannons, but some protesters reportedly entered the Congress office premises, leading to tension.
Further, we found the same viral video on the official Facebook page of Indian National Congress - Madhya Pradesh, where it was posted on February 26, 2026. In the post, the Congress unit alleged that BJYM workers and BJP-affiliated individuals had entered the Congress office, vandalized property, and created chaos in the presence of police officials.
Conclusion
Our research found that the viral claim is misleading. The video is from February 21, 2026, when BJYM workers protested outside a Congress office and engaged in vandalism. The footage is now being falsely shared as evidence of an internal rebellion by Congress workers against Rahul Gandhi.
Brief Overview of the EU AI Act
The EU AI Act, Regulation (EU) 2024/1689, was officially published in the EU Official Journal on 12 July 2024. This landmark legislation on Artificial Intelligence (AI) will come into force just 20 days after publication, setting harmonized rules across the EU. It amends key regulations and directives to ensure a robust framework for AI technologies. The AI Act, a set of EU rules governing AI, has been in development for two years and now, the EU AI Act enters into force across all 27 EU Member States on 1 August 2024, with certain future deadlines tied up and the enforcement of the majority of its provisions will commence on 2 August 2026. The law prohibits certain uses of AI tools, including those that threaten citizens' rights, such as biometric categorization, untargeted scraping of faces, and systems that try to read emotions are banned in the workplace and schools, as are social scoring systems. It also prohibits the use of predictive policing tools in some instances. The law takes a phased approach to implementing the EU's AI rulebook, meaning there are various deadlines between now and then as different legal provisions will start to apply.
The framework puts different obligations on AI developers, depending on use cases and perceived risk. The bulk of AI uses will not be regulated as they are considered low-risk, but a small number of potential AI use cases are banned under the law. High-risk use cases, such as biometric uses of AI or AI used in law enforcement, employment, education, and critical infrastructure, are allowed under the law but developers of such apps face obligations in areas like data quality and anti-bias considerations. A third risk tier also applies some lighter transparency requirements for makers of tools like AI chatbots.
In case of failure to comply with the Act, the companies in the EU providing, distributing, importing, and using AI systems and GPAI models, are subject to fines of up to EUR 35 million or seven per cent of the total worldwide annual turnover, whichever is higher.
Key highlights of EU AI Act Provisions
- The AI Act classifies AI according to its risk. It prohibits Unacceptable risks such as social scoring systems and manipulative AI. The regulation mostly addresses high-risk AI systems.
- Limited-risk AI systems are subject to lighter transparency obligations and according to the act, the developers and deployers must ensure that the end-users are aware that the interaction they are having is with AI such as Chatbots and Deepfakes. The AI Act allows the free use of minimal-risk AI. This includes the majority of AI applications currently available in the EU single market like AI-enabled video games, and spam filters, but with the advancement of Gen AI changes with regards to this might be done. The majority of obligations fall on providers (developers) of high-risk AI systems that intend to place on the market or put into service high-risk AI systems in the EU, regardless of whether they are based in the EU or a third country. And also, a third-country provider where the high-risk AI system’s output is used in the EU.
- Users are natural or legal persons who deploy an AI system in a professional capacity, not affected end-users. Users (deployers) of high-risk AI systems have some obligations, though less than providers (developers). This applies to users located in the EU, and third-country users where the AI system’s output is used in the EU.
- General purpose AI or GPAI model providers must provide technical documentation, and instructions for use, comply with the Copyright Directive, and publish a summary of the content used for training. Free and open license GPAI model providers only need to comply with copyright and publish the training data summary, unless they present a systemic risk. All providers of GPAI models that present a systemic risk – open or closed – must also conduct model evaluations, and adversarial testing, and track and report serious incidents and ensure cybersecurity protections.
- The Codes of Practice will account for international approaches. It will cover but not necessarily be limited to the obligations, particularly the relevant information to include in technical documentation for authorities and downstream providers, identification of the type and nature of systemic risks and their sources, and the modalities of risk management accounting for specific challenges in addressing risks due to the way they may emerge and materialize throughout the value chain. The AI Office may invite GPAI model providers, and relevant national competent authorities to participate in drawing up the codes, while civil society, industry, academia, downstream providers and independent experts may support the process.
Application & Timeline of Act
The EU AI Act will be fully applicable 24 months after entry into force, but some parts will be applicable sooner, for instance the ban on AI systems posing unacceptable risks will apply six months after the entry into force. The Codes of Practice will apply nine months after entry into force. Rules on general-purpose AI systems that need to comply with transparency requirements will apply 12 months after the entry into force. High-risk systems will have more time to comply with the requirements as the obligations concerning them will become applicable 36 months after the entry into force. The expected timeline for the same is:
- August 1st, 2024: The AI Act will enter into force.
- February 2025: Prohibition of certain AI systems - Chapters I (general provisions) & II (prohibited AI systems) will apply; Prohibition of certain AI systems.
- August 2025: Chapter III Section 4 (notifying authorities), Chapter V (general purpose AI models), Chapter VII (governance), Chapter XII (confidentiality and penalties), and Article 78 (confidentiality) will apply, except for Article 101 (fines for General Purpose AI providers); Requirements for new GPAI models.
- August 2026: The whole AI Act applies, except for Article 6(1) & corresponding obligations (one of the categories of high-risk AI systems);
- August 2027: Article 6(1) & corresponding obligations apply.
The AI Act sets out clear definitions for the different actors involved in AI, such as the providers, deployers, importers, distributors, and product manufacturers. This means all parties involved in the development, usage, import, distribution, or manufacturing of AI systems will be held accountable. Along with this, the AI Act also applies to providers and deployers of AI systems located outside of the EU, e.g., in Switzerland, if output produced by the system is intended to be used in the EU. The Act applies to any AI system within the EU that is on the market, in service, or in use, covering both AI providers (the companies selling AI systems) and AI deployers (the organizations using those systems).
In short, the AI Act will apply to different companies across the AI distribution chain, including providers, deployers, importers, and distributors (collectively referred to as “Operators”). The EU AI Act also has extraterritorial application and can also apply to companies not established in the EU, or providers outside the EU if they -make an AI system or GPAI model available on the EU market. Even if only the output generated by the AI system is used in the EU, the Act still applies to such providers and deployers.
CyberPeace Outlook
The EU AI Act, approved by EU lawmakers in 2024, is a landmark legislation designed to protect citizens' health, safety, and fundamental rights from potential harm caused by AI systems. The AI Act will apply to AI systems and GPAI models. The Act creates a tiered risk categorization system with various regulations and stiff penalties for noncompliance. The Act adopts a risk-based approach to AI governance, categorizing potential risks into four tiers: unacceptable, high, limited, and low. Violations of banned systems carry the highest fine: €35 million, or 7 percent of global annual revenue. It establishes transparency requirements for general-purpose AI systems. The regulation also provides specific rules for general-purpose AI (GPAI) models and lays down more stringent requirements for GPAI models with 'high-impact capabilities' that could pose a systemic risk and have a significant impact on the internal market. For high-risk AI systems, the AI Act addresses the issues of fundamental rights impact assessment and data protection impact assessment.
The EU AI Act aims to enhance trust in AI technologies by establishing clear regulatory standards governing AI. We encourage regulatory frameworks that strive to balance the desire to foster innovation with the critical need to prevent unethical practices that may cause user harm. The legislation can be seen as strengthening the EU's position as a global leader in AI innovation and developing regulatory frameworks for emerging technologies. It sets a global benchmark for regulating AI. The companies to which the act applies will need to make sure their practices align with the same. The act may inspire other nations to develop their own legislation contributing to global AI governance. The world of AI is complex and challenging, the implementation of regulatory checks, and compliance by the concerned companies, all pose a conundrum. However, in the end, balancing innovation with ethical considerations is paramount.
At the same hand, the tech sector welcomes regulatory progress but warns that overly-rigid regulations could stifle innovation. Hence flexibility and adaptability are key to effective AI governance. The journey towards robust AI regulation has begun in major countries, and it is important that we find the right balance between safety and innovation and also take into consideration the industry reactions.
References:
- https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=OJ:L_202401689
- https://www.theverge.com/2024/7/12/24197058/eu-ai-act-regulations-bans-deadline
- https://techcrunch.com/2024/07/12/eus-ai-act-gets-published-in-blocs-official-journal-starting-clock-on-legal-deadlines/
- https://www.wsgr.com/en/insights/eu-ai-act-to-enter-into-force-in-august.html
- https://www.techtarget.com/searchenterpriseai/tip/Is-your-business-ready-for-the-EU-AI-Act
- https://www.simmons-simmons.com/en/publications/clyimpowh000ouxgkw1oidakk/the-eu-ai-act-a-quick-guide
The evolution of technology has presented both profound benefits and considerable challenges. It has benefited us with global interconnectivity, optimisation of the workforce, faster and solution-oriented approach, but at the same time increases risks of cybercrimes and the misuse of technology via online theft, fraud, and abuse. As the reliance on technology increases, it makes the users vulnerable to cyberattacks.
One way to address this nuisance is to set global standards and initiate measures for cooperation by integrating the efforts of international institutions such as UN bodies and others. The United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute, which combats cybercrime and promotes the responsible use of technology, is making waves in these issues.
Understanding the Scope of the Problem
Crowdstrike had estimated the cybersecurity market at $207.77 billion in 2024 and expected it to reach $376.55 billion by 2029 and continue growing at a CAGR of 12.63% during the forecast period. In October of 2024, Forbes predicted that the cost of cyber attacks on the global economy would be over $10.5 trillion.
The developments in technology have provided cybercriminals with more sophisticated means to commit cybercrimes. These include cybercrimes like data breaches, which are increasingly common, such as phishing attacks, ransomware, social engineering, and IoT attacks. Their impact is evident across various domains, including economic and social spheres. The victims of cybercrimes can often suffer from stress, anxiety, fear of being victimised again, a lack of trust and social polarisation/stigmatisation.
UNICRI’s Strategic Approach
UNICRI actively combats cybercrimes and technology misuse, focusing on cybersecurity, organized crime in cyberspace, and terrorists' internet use. Since 2020, it has monitored social media misuse, analysed tools to debunk misinformation and balanced security with human rights.
The key focus areas of UNICRI’s strategic approach include cybersecurity in robotics, critical infrastructure, and SCADA systems, digital forensics, child online protection and addressing online profiling and discrimination. It further supports LEAs (judges, prosecutors, and investigators) by providing them with specialised training. Its strategies to counter cybercrime and tech misuse include capacity-building exercises for law enforcement, developing international legal frameworks, and fostering public-private collaborations.
Key Initiatives under UNICRI Strategic Programme Framework of 2023-2026
The key initiatives under UNICRI set out the strategic priority areas that will guide its work. It includes:
- Prevent and Counter Violent Extremism: By addressing the drivers of radicalisation, gender-based discrimination, and leveraging sports for prevention.
- Combat Organised Crime: Via tackling illicit financial flows, counterfeiting, and supply chain crimes while promoting asset recovery.
- Promotion of Emerging Technology Governance: Encouraging responsible AI use, mitigating cybercrime risks, and fostering digital inclusivity.
- Rule of Law and Justice Access: Enhancing justice systems for women and vulnerable populations while advancing criminal law education.
- CBRN Risk Mitigation: Leveraging expert networks and whole-of-society strategies to address chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear risks.
The Challenges and Opportunities: CyberPeace Takeaways
The challenges that affect the regulation of cybercrimes are most often caused due to jurisdictional barriers, the lack of resources, and the rapid pace of technological change. This is due to the cross-border nature of cybercrimes and as many nations lack the expertise or infrastructure to address sophisticated cyber threats. The regulatory or legislative frameworks often get outpaced by technology developments, including quantum computing, deepfakes, or blockchain misuse. Due to this, these crimes are often unpunished.
The opportunities that have been developing for innovation in cybercrime prevention, include AI and machine learning tools to detect cybercrimes, enhanced international cooperation that can strengthen the collective defence mechanisms, like multi-stakeholder approaches. Capacity Building initiatives for continuous training and education help LEAs and judicial systems adapt to emerging threats, is a continuous effort that requires participation from all sectors, be it public or private.
Conclusion
Due to cybercrimes and the threats they induce on individuals, communities, and global security, the proactive approach by UNICRI of combining international cooperation, capacity-building and innovative strategies is pivotal in combating these challenges. By addressing the challenges of organised crime in cyberspace, child online protection, and emerging technology governance, UNICRI exemplifies the power of strategic engagement. While jurisdictional barriers and resource limitations persist, the opportunities in AI, global collaboration, and education offer a path forward. With the evolution of technology, our defences must also be dynamic and ever evolving, and UNICRI’s efforts are essential to building a safer, more inclusive digital future for all.
References
- https://unicri.it/special_topics/securing_cyberspace
- https://www.forbes.com/sites/bernardmarr/2023/10/11/the-10-biggest-cyber-security-trends-in-2024-everyone-must-be-ready-for-now/
