#FactCheck-Old Video of Dangerous Auto-Rickshaw Stunt on Delhi’s Signature Bridge Falsely Linked to Prayagraj
Executive Summary
A picture is rapidly going viral on social media, showing Indian cricketer Virat Kohli and actor Anushka Sharma having breakfast together. Users are sharing this photo, presenting it as a "candid" (real) moment.
Research by the CyberPeace Research Wing revealed that the photo of Virat Kohli and Anushka Sharma having breakfast is completely fake. This image does not depict a real moment, but has been created using Artificial Intelligence (AI).
Claim
A picture is rapidly going viral on social media, showing Indian cricketer Virat Kohli and actor Anushka Sharma having breakfast together. Users are sharing this photo, presenting it as a "candid" (real) moment.
https://www.facebook.com/reel/951138134598230
Fact Check
We extracted several keyframes from the viral video and searched them using the Google Lens tool. We found that this video was also quite viral on X (formerly Twitter). Responding to users, the official X handle of DCP Yamuna Nagar, Prayagraj, stated, “Upon a detailed research of the said matter/video, it has been found that it is not from the Naini Yamuna Bridge, but is a 2.5-year-old video from Delhi’s Signature Bridge. Please do not spread misleading information, otherwise legal action will be initiated against it.”
During our search, we found a post on the official X handle of the Delhi Police. Sharing the viral video, they wrote that taking cognizance of the auto-rickshaw stunt incident on the Signature Bridge, the Delhi Traffic Police seized the auto-rickshaw and issued a challan totaling ₹32,000 under various sections of the Motor Vehicles Act.
https://x.com/DelhiPolice/status/1735268792434057352?s=20
Conclusion
In our research, the viral post turned out to be fake. A video of an incident that took place on Delhi's Signature Bridge in 2023 is now being falsely circulated to spread misinformation as an incident from a bridge in Prayagraj. No such incident has taken place on the Naini Bridge in Prayagraj.
Related Blogs
Introduction
In January 2026, the Basic Act on the Development of Artificial Intelligence and the Establishment of a Foundation for Trustworthiness came into effect in South Korea, establishing one of the first national AI laws in the world. The bill, enacted by the National Assembly of Korea in December 2024 and implemented from January 22, 2026, aims to strike a balance between the rapid advancement of technology and clear safeguards against risks, as well as transparency, accountability, and responsible AI use. It puts Seoul and the European Union on the frontline of developing legal systems for artificial intelligence and indicates a long-term goal of becoming an AI power on the global stage.
What the AI Basic Act Covers
The AI Basic Act consists of 19 separate AI bills that are merged into a single piece of legislation that covers the lifecycle of AI, including research and development, deployment, and utilisation. It is very wide in its coverage: it refers to any AI system that influences the Korean market or users inside the country, irrespective of the country in which it is created. The law does not apply to national defence and security applications.
The law defines key concepts like artificial intelligence, generative AI, and high-impact AI and establishes the principles of ethical AI, safety, user rights, industry support, and national policy coordination. It also offers a legal foundation for the activities of the government to promote AI innovation without jeopardising the common good.
Fundamentally, the AI Basic Act is designed to establish a culture of trust between businesses and the government/citizens. It does not prohibit AI technologies and does not excessively limit innovation. Instead, it creates the framework of responsible development and economic growth.
Guardrails for Safety and Accountability
One of the defining features of the AI Basic Act is its risk-based approach. Rather than considering all AI systems as similar, it makes a distinction between ordinary and high-impact AI systems, the ones applied in sectors where the wrong or unsafe decision can have a major impact on the safety, rights, or critical infrastructure of the population. Some of them can be seen in healthcare, transportation, financial services, education, and public services.
The high-impact AI operators must integrate risk management plans, human controls, and surveillance systems. In critical decision-making situations, human control should be available at all times; that is, machines can help but not override human control where human safety or other human rights are involved.
The law enables the regulators to perform on-site checks, demand documentation, and conduct compliance investigations. Fines for breaches may go up to 30 million Korean won (approximately 21,000 US dollars). It has a one-year period of transition that is based on guidance but not enforcement, thus allowing companies time to implement compliance measures before imposing fines.
These requirements contribute to enhancing accountability by defining who is accountable for the safety outcomes. The law in South Korea is placed in the ecosystem, as opposed to the methods in which industry self-governance alone is utilised.
Transparency and Labelling Requirements
The AI Basic Act is based on transparency. The legislation ensures that users are notified before an AI system is operating, particularly with the generation of AI outputs that could be confused with human-created material. As an example, AI-generated text, images, video, or audio that may be difficult to distinguish between reality and fake must have obvious labels or watermarks to allow users to understand the source of the content.
The necessity to label is meant to fight misinformation, misleading activities, and unintended influence on the perception of the people. It is based on international anxiety regarding AI-generated content, such as deepfakes, manipulated media, and misleading online advertisements that have already been addressed separately in policy by South Korea, as well as discussions of data governance.
The transparency is also applied to the process of decision-making in AI systems. Developers and operators should be able to give explicit information about the way in which high-impact systems make their conclusions so that those who are victims of automated decisions can seek meaningful explanations. Although specific explainability criteria are in the process of being developed, the law grounds the principle that AI cannot act behind the scenes in situations where crucial decisions are being made.
Data Privacy and User Protection
The AI governance practice in South Korea is complementary to its current data protection laws, the Personal Information Protection Act (PIPA), which is broadly regarded as equivalent to major international data protection regulations like the GDPR in regard to personal data laws. The AI Basic Act provides an explanation as to how the data can be gathered, processed, and utilised within AI systems with regard to privacy rights, particularly in areas of high impact.
The law does not supersede the personal data protection policies, but it sets certain conditions on how AI developers must address the data to be utilised in training, testing, and running AIs. Operators will be required to document their data workflows and demonstrate how they guard the privacy of their users, including by transparency and consent mechanisms where necessary. This can assist in ensuring that the information that is utilised in AI functions is regulated by definite norms, and it is more difficult to avoid privacy requirements in the name of innovation.
Accountability and Governance Infrastructure
The AI Basic Act establishes a national policy framework of AI governance. The National Artificial Intelligence Strategy Committee, chaired by the President, is at the top and proposes the overall AI policy and aligns it with national objectives. The organisations that would support this are the specialised organisations that deal with safety, risk assessment, and research and the policy centre that would analyse the effects of AI on society and assist in its adoption by the industry.
This institutional structure facilitates strategic guidance as well as operational control. It is through incorporating AI governance in the administration of the people, but not into the market forces, that South Korea wishes to have the ethical and societal concerns become part of the sectors and agencies.
Promoting Innovation and Industrial Support
Although the AI Basic Act does not disregard regulation, it is not a law of restrictions. It also offers legal justification for research and development, human capital, and the growth of the AI industry, with special consideration for startups and small and medium-sized businesses. The legislation promotes AI clusters, long-term funding programmes, and policies to bring foreign talent to the Korean AI ecosystem.
This bidimensional approach of compliance and support is indicative of the broader desire of Korea to become one of the leading AI powers in the world, along with the US and China. The government has pointed out that it will encourage trust by having clear and predictable rules that will attract investment and maintain innovation and not stifle it.
What This Means Globally
The AI Basic Act of South Korea is not only interesting in its contents but also in its timing. It is also among the first thorough AI legislations to come into force in the world, and it beats the gradual regulatory implementations in other parts of the globe, like the European Union. Its system incorporates a principle-based framework, transparency requirements, accountability regulations, and industrial support, which reflects a contrasting model to either pure prescriptive risk regulation or lax self-regulation models elsewhere.
Other critics, such as industry groups and civil society organisations, have suggested that some of the protections may be more explicit, in particular to those who are harmed by AI systems, or to establish high-impact categories. Nonetheless, the framework sets a benchmark upon which most nations will pay close attention when they establish their own AI regimes.
Conclusion
The AI Basic Act puts South Korea at the forefront of national AI regulation, including very well-developed guardrails that enforce transparency, ethical control, accountability, and data protection in addition to fostering innovation. It recognises that AI could lead to economic and social advantages, yet also actual risks, particularly when systems are opaque, autonomous, or widely implemented. South Korea has gone holistically in responsible AI governance by integrating human oversight, labelling requirements, risk management planning, and governance infrastructure into law to be emulated by other countries in the years to come.
Sources
- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/jan/29/south-korea-world-first-ai-regulation-laws
- https://www.oecd.org/content/dam/oecd/en/publications/reports/2025/10/artificial-intelligence-and-the-labour-market-in-korea_af668423/68ab1a5a-en.pdf
- https://asianintelligence.ai/south-korea
- https://aibasicact.kr/
- https://aibusinessweekly.net/p/south-korea-ai-basic-act-takes-effect-jan22-2026
- https://asiadaily.org/news/12112/
A video circulating widely on social media claims that Indian cricketer Virat Kohli made a sarcastic remark about fast bowler Prasidh Krishna ahead of the New Zealand series. In the clip, Kohli is allegedly heard saying that he expected to be the top scorer of the series, but lost all hope after seeing Prasidh Krishna’s name in the squad.
Users sharing the video claim that Kohli publicly commented on Prasidh Krishna in this manner.
Research by the CyberPeace Foundation has found the viral claim to be false. Our probe revealed that the viral clip has been digitally manipulated. The video is originally from a 2024 advertisement featuring Virat Kohli, in which his voice has been altered using deepfake (AI-generated) technology and falsely presented with a misleading narrative.
Claim
The video was shared on Instagram on January 6, 2025, with users claiming that Kohli made the remark after the New Zealand squad was announced. The post included the altered audio suggesting Kohli’s disappointment over Prasidh Krishna’s selection. Link, archive link
Fact Check:
To verify the claim, we extracted key frames from the viral video and conducted a Google Reverse Image Search. This led us to the original video posted by Virat Kohli himself on X (formerly Twitter) on April 15, 2024. The original clip was part of a brand advertisement, and no such statement about the New Zealand series or Prasidh Krishna was made in it. Link and Screenshot
A close review of the viral clip raised suspicions due to the unnatural tone and inconsistencies in Kohli’s voice. To confirm this, we analysed the video using the AI detection tool Aurigin AI. The tool’s results showed that the audio in the viral clip is 100 percent AI-generated, confirming that Kohli’s voice was artificially manipulated.
Conclusion
The CyberPeace Foundation’s research confirms that the viral video claiming Virat Kohli mocked Prasidh Krishna is fake and misleading. The clip is taken from an old advertisement and has been doctored using deepfake technology to alter Kohli’s voice. The video is being circulated on social media with a false claim, and Virat Kohli has made no such statement regarding the New Zealand series or Prasidh Krishna.
Executive Summary:
A video of people throwing rocks at vehicles is being shared widely on social media, claiming an incident of unrest in Jammu and Kashmir, India. However, our thorough research has revealed that the video is not from India, but from a protest in Kenya on 25 June 2025. Therefore, the video is misattributed and shared out of context to promote false information.
Claim:
The viral video shows people hurling stones at army or police vehicles and is claimed to be from Jammu and Kashmir, implying ongoing unrest and anti-government sentiment in the region.
Fact Check:
To verify the validity of the viral statement, we did a reverse image search by taking key frames from the video. The results clearly demonstrated that the video was not sourced from Jammu and Kashmir as claimed, but rather it was consistent with footage from Nairobi, Kenya, where a significant protest took place on 25 June 2025. Protesters in Kenya had congregated to express their outrage against police brutality and government action, which ultimately led to violent clashes with police.
We also came across a YouTube video with similar news and frames. The protests were part of a broader anti-government movement to mark its one-year time period.
To support the context, we did a keyword search of any mob violence or recent unrest in J&K on a reputable Indian news source, But our search did not turn up any mention of protests or similar events in J&K around the relevant time. Based on this evidence, it is clear that the video has been intentionally misrepresented and is being circulated with false context to mislead viewers.
Conclusion:
The assertion that the viral video shows a protest in Jammu and Kashmir is incorrect. The video appears to be taken from a protest in Nairobi, Kenya, in June 2025. Labeling the video incorrectly only serves to spread misinformation and stir up uncalled for political emotions. Always be sure to verify where content is sourced from before you believe it or share it.
- Claim: Army faces heavy resistance from Kashmiri youth — the valley is in chaos.
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
