#Factcheck-Viral Image of Men Riding an Elephant Next to a Tiger in Bihar is Misleading

‍Introduction

‍

The misinformation crisis has evolved from being merely an abstract risk to a clear-cut and measurable danger to individuals, families, institutions and the whole information ecosystem. The recent death hoax with the famous actor Dharmendra is a perfect illustration of how the monster of falsehoods rises, conquers the world and does damage before the mechanisms of correction have a chance to operate. The first week of November 2025 saw the first wave of reports from different social media accounts and even some online news outlets that claimed Dharmendra had died at the age of 89. The news travelled like wildfire, causing confusion, grief and emotional suffering in large circles of fans, one could say the whole world. But then, the family came to the scene with the loudest, clearest, and most conclusive denial of them all. This case is not a one-time event. It is part of a cycle of misinformation that goes through the stages from one unverified claim to the next due to the emotional value, the virality of platforms, and the accelerating online engagement.

‍

How One Wrong Post Can Create Worry and Fear

‍

This kind of false news spreads fast on social media because people share emotional posts without checking the source, and automated accounts often repeat the same claim which makes it look true. Such hoaxes create fear, sadness and stress for fans, and they place sudden pressure on the family who must deal with public worry at a time when they need calm and privacy. The message shared by Hema Malini who is the wife of the actor shows how hurtful and careless misinformation can be, and it reminds everyone that even one false post can create real emotional damage for many people.

‍

‍

Why This Hoax Spread So Quickly

‍

1. Sensationalism Drives Engagement: Rumours regarding the passing of a public figure, particularly someone who is universally loved, cause an immediate outburst of feelings. Such news is practically taken for granted by the online public, who are very likely to share it, most of the time without checking its authenticity, which, in turn, leads to viral spread. 
2. Very Fast Weaving-in on social media: Social media networks are very much made for swift sharing. Long before the official sources were able to either confirm or dismiss the matter, posts, reels, and messages ripped through the networks.
3. Digital Users Not Verifying Source: A large part of the audience depends on screenshots, forwards, and unverified posts for keeping up with the news. This opens a very nice environment for the spreading of hoaxes. 
4. Weak Verification Protocols: Although there have been measures to inform the public about misinformation, most news companies still give priority to the speed of reporting rather than its correctness, though not all the time, especially for the more entertaining and attractive topics like the health or death of famous people. 
5. Algorithmic Amplification Risks: The engagement is mainly driven by algorithms that bring to the surface the posts that evoke strong emotions. In a way, it is very unfair because the false or sensational claims are getting in front at the same time as the corrective updates, hence, the public is getting misled. In the absence of algorithmic safeguards, misinformation is on the rise and becoming stronger.

‍

Best Practices For Users: 

‍

• Make sure to verify before sharing, especially if the topic is about health or death. 
• Get updates by following official accounts rather than through sharing of viral forwards. 
• Be aware of the emotional manipulation tactics used in misleading information. 

Conclusion

‍

The rumour surrounding Dharmendra's death is yet another example that misinformation, whether promptly corrected or not, can still inflict distress, cause loss of trust and damage to reputation. It also emphasises the need for stronger information governance, responsible digital journalism, and platform intervention mechanisms as a matter of urgency. This incident, from clicks to consequences, points to a basic truth: misinformation in the digital age is quicker to spread than facts, and the responsibility of putting a stop to it falls on all the stakeholders’ platforms, media, and users.

‍

References

‍

• https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hindi/bollywood/news/esha-deol-and-hema-malini-dismiss-dharmendras-fake-death-news-relieved-fans-pray-for-actors-speedy-recovery-aap-jld-se-jld-apne-ghar-aye/articleshow/125242843.cms
• https://www.altnews.in/media-misreport-bollywood-actor-dharmendra-hasnt-passed-away-yet/
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/india/dharmendra-death-news-bollywoods-veeru-and-he-man-passes-away-at-89/articleshow/125238900.cms

‍

India’s online gaming industry has grown at lightning speed, drawing millions of users across age groups. From casual games and e-sports to fantasy leagues and online poker, digital entertainment has become both a social and economic phenomenon. But with this growth came rising concerns of addiction, financial loss, misleading ads, and even criminal misuse of gaming platforms for illegal betting. To address these concerns, the Government of India introduced the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act and draft Rules in October 2025. While the Act represents a crucial step toward accountability and user protection, it also raises difficult questions about freedom, innovation, and investor confidence.

‍

The Current Legal Framework

‍

The 2025 Act, along with corresponding changes in the Information Technology and GST laws, aims to create a safer and more transparent gaming environment.

1. Ban on real-money games:

Any online game where money is involved, whether it’s entry fees, bets, or prizes, is now banned, regardless of whether it is based on skill or chance. As a result, previously permitted formats such as fantasy sports, rummy, and poker once defended as “games of skill” now fall within the category of banned activities.

 2. Promotion of e-sports and social gaming

Not all gaming is banned. Casual games, e-sports, and social games that don’t involve money are fully allowed. The government is encouraging these as part of India’s growing digital economy.

3. Advertising and financial restrictions: Banks, payment gateways, and advertisers cannot facilitate or promote real-money games. Any platform offering deposits or prize pools can be blocked.

4. Central regulatory authority: The law establishes a national body to classify games, monitor compliance, and address complaints. It has the power to order the locking of violative content and websites.

‍

Why Regulation Was Needed

‍

The push for regulation came after a surge in online betting scams, debt-related suicides, and disputes about whether certain apps were skill-based or chance-based. State governments had taken conflicting positions, some banning, others licensing such games. Meanwhile, offshore gaming apps operated freely in India’s grey market.

The 2025 Act thus attempts to impose uniformity, protect minors, and bring moral and fiscal discipline to a rapidly expanding digital frontier. Its underlying philosophy resembles that of the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, encouraging responsible use of technology rather than an unregulated free-for-all.

‍

Key Challenges and Gaps

‍

(a) Clarity of Definitions

The Act bans all real-money games, ignoring the difference between skill-based games and chance-based games. This could lead to legal challenges under Article 19(1)(g), which protects the right to do business. Games like rummy or fantasy cricket, which need real skill, arguably shouldn’t be banned outright

(b) Weak Consumer and Child Protection

Although age verification and KYC are mandated, compliance at the user-end remains uncertain. India needs a Responsible Gaming Code covering:

• Spending limits and cooling-off periods;
• Self-exclusion options;
• Transparent disclosure of odds; and
• Algorithmic fairness audits.
  These measures can help mitigate addiction and prevent exploitation of minors.

(c) Federal Conflicts

“Betting and gambling” fall within the State List under India’s Constitution, yet the 2025 Act seeks national uniformity. States like Tamil Nadu and Karnataka already have independent bans. Without harmonisation, legal disputes between state and central authorities could multiply. A cooperative federal framework allowing states to adopt central norms voluntarily could offer flexibility without fragmentation.

(d) Regulatory Transparency

The gaming regulator has a lot of power, like deciding which games are allowed and blocking websites. But it’s not clear who chooses its members or how people can challenge its decisions. Including court oversight, public input, and regular reporting would make the regulator fairer and more reliable.

‍

What’s Next for India’s Online Gaming

‍

India’s online gaming scene is at a turning point. Banning all money-based games might reduce risks, but it also slows innovation and limits opportunities. A better approach could be to license skill-based or low-risk games with proper KYC and audits, set up a Responsible Gaming Charter with input from government, industry, and civil society, and create rules for offshore platforms targeting Indian players. Player data should be protected under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023, and the law should be reviewed every few years to keep up with new tech like the metaverse, NFTs, and AI-powered games.

‍

Conclusion

‍

CyberPeace has already provided its detailed feedback to MEITy as on 30th October, 2025 hopes the finalised rules are released soon with the acknowledgment of the challenges discussed. The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, marks an important turning point since this is India’s first serious attempt to bring order to a chaotic digital arena. The goal is to keep players safe, stop crime, and hold platforms accountable. But the tricky part is moving away from blanket bans. We need rules that let new ideas grow, respect people’s rights, and keep players safe. With a few smart changes and fair enforcement, India could have a gaming industry that’s safe, responsible, and ready to compete globally.

‍

References 

1. https://ssrana.in/articles/indias-online-gaming-bill-2025-regulation-prohibition-and-the-future-of-digital-play/ 
2. https://www.google.com/amp/s/m.economictimes.com/news/economy/policy/new-online-gaming-law-takes-effect-money-games-banned-from-today/amp_articleshow/124255401.cms 
3. https://www.google.com/amp/s/timesofindia.indiatimes.com/technology/tech-news/government-proposes-to-make-violation-of-online-money-game-rules-non-bailable-draft-rules-ban-/amp_articleshow/124277740.cms 
4. https://www.egf.org.in/ 
5. https://www.pib.gov.in/PressNoteDetails.aspx?NoteId=155075&ModuleId=3 

‍

Introduction:

Welcome to the second edition of our blog on Digital forensics series. In our previous blog we discussed what digital forensics is,  the process followed by the tools, and the subsequent challenges faced in the field. Further, we looked at how the future of Digital Forensics will hold in the current scenario.  Today, we will explore differences between 3 particular similar sounding terms that vary significantly in functionality when implemented: Copying, Cloning and Imaging.

In Digital Forensics, the preservation and analysis of electronic evidence are important for investigations and legal proceedings. Replication of the data and devices is one of the fundamental tasks in this domain, without compromising the integrity of the original evidence. 

Three primary techniques -- copying, cloning, and imaging -- are used for this purpose. Each technique has its own strengths and is applied according to the needs of the investigation.

In this blog, we will examine the differences between copying, cloning and imaging. We will talk about the importance of each technique, their applications and why imaging  is considered the best for forensic investigations.

Copying

Copying means duplicating data or files from one location to another. When one does copying, it implies that one is using standard copy commands. However, when dealing with evidence, it might be hard to use copy only. It is because the standard copy can alter the metadata and change the hidden or deleted data .

 The characteristics of copying include: 

• Speed: copying is simpler and faster,compared to cloning or imaging.
•  Risk: The risk involved in copying is that the metadata might be altered and all the data might be captured.

Cloning

It is the process where the transfer of the entire contents of a hard drive or a storage device is done  on another storage device. This process is known as cloning . This way, the cloning process captures both the active data and the unallocated space and hidden partitions, thus containing the whole structure of the original device. Cloning is generally used at the sector level of the device. Clones can be used as the working copy of a device .

Characteristics of cloning: 

•  bit-for-bit replication: cloning keeps the exact content and the whole structure of the original device. 
• Use cases: cloning is used when it is needed to keep the original device intact for further examination or a legal affair. 
•  Time consuming: Cloning is usually longer in comparison to simple copying since it involves the whole detailed replication. Though it depends on various factors like the size of the storage device, the speed of the devices involved, and the method of cloning.

Imaging:

It is the process of creating a forensic image of a storage device. A forensic image is a replica copy of every bit of data that was on the source device, this including the allocated, unallocated, and the available slack space .

 The image is then used for analysis and investigation, and the original evidence is left untouched. Images can’t be used as the working copies of a device.  Unlike cloning, which produces working copies, forensic images are typically used for analysis and investigation purposes and are not intended for regular use as working copies.

Characteristics of Imaging:

•  Integrity: Imaging ensures the integrity and authenticity of the evidence produced
•  Flexibility: Forensic image replicas can be mounted as a virtual drive to create image-specific mode for analysis of data without affecting the original evidence . 
• Metadata: Imaging captures metadata associated with the data, thus promoting forensic analysis.

Key Differences

• Purpose: Copying is for everyday use but not good for forensic investigations requiring data integrity. Cloning and imaging are made for forensic preservation.
• Depth of Replication: Cloning and imaging captures the entire storage device including hidden, unallocated, and deleted data  whereas copying may miss crucial forensic data.
• Data Integrity: Imaging and cloning keep the integrity of the original evidence thus making them suitable for legal and forensic use. Which is a critical aspect of forensic investigations.
• Forensic Soundness: Imaging is considered the best in digital forensics due to its comprehensive and non-invasive nature.
• Cloning is generally from one hard disk to another, where as imaging creates a compressed file that contains a snapshot of the entire hard drive or a specific partitions

Conclusion

Therefore, copying, cloning, and imaging all deal with duplication of data or storage devices with significant variations, especially in digital forensic. However, for forensic investigations, imaging is the most selected approach due to the correct preservation of the evidence state for any analysis or legal use . Therefore, it is essential for forensic investigators to understand these rigorous differences to avail of real and uncontaminated digital evidence for their investigation and legal argument.

‍