#FactCheck -AI-Generated Image Falsely Claims Mukesh and Nita Ambani Gifted Luxury Car to Suryakumar Yadav
Executive Summary
A picture circulating on social media allegedly shows Reliance Industries chairman Mukesh Ambani and Nita Ambani presenting a luxury car to India’s T20 team captain Suryakumar Yadav. The image is being widely shared with the claim that the Ambani family gifted the cricketer a luxury car in recognition of his outstanding performance. However, research conducted by the CyberPeace found the viral claim to be false. The research revealed that the image being circulated online is not authentic but generated using artificial intelligence (AI).
Claim
On February 8, 2025, a Facebook user shared the viral image claiming that Mukesh Ambani and Nita Ambani gifted a luxury car to Suryakumar Yadav following his brilliant innings. The post has been widely circulated across social media platforms. In another instance, a user shared a collage in which one image shows Suryakumar Yadav receiving an award, while another depicts him with Nita Ambani, further amplifying the claim.
- https://www.facebook.com/61559815349585/posts/122207061746327178/?rdid=0MukeT6c7WK1uB8m#
- https://archive.ph/wip/UH9Xh
Fact Check:
Upon closely examining the viral image, certain visual inconsistencies raised suspicion that it might be AI-generated. To verify its authenticity, the image was analysed using the AI detection tool Hive Moderation, which indicated a 99 percent probability that the image was AI-generated.
In the next step of the research, the image was also analysed using another AI detection tool, Sightengine, which found a 98 percent likelihood that the image was created using artificial intelligence.
Conclusion
The research clearly establishes that the viral image claiming Mukesh Ambani and Nita Ambani gifted a luxury car to Suryakumar Yadav is misleading. The picture is not real and has been generated using AI.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
An image is being widely shared on social media with the claim that Iranian missile forces targeted an LPG tanker heading towards India, causing a massive fire onboard. CyberPeace Research Wing ’s research found the claim to be misleading. The research revealed that the viral image is not related to any recent Iran-India development or any missile attack. The image actually shows a fire incident involving the Cameroon-flagged LPG tanker MV Falcon near the coast of Aden, Yemen, in October 2025, and is being circulated with a false context.
Claim
A Facebook user shared the viral image on July 8, 2026, claiming: “Iranian missile force has struck an LPG tanker going to India.” The post link, archive link, and screenshot are provided below.
Fact Check
To verify the viral claim, we conducted a keyword-based search on Google. However, we did not find any credible media report confirming that an India-bound LPG tanker was targeted by Iranian missile forces. During the research, we extracted keyframes from the viral image and conducted a reverse image search using Google Lens. The search led us to a report published by NDTV on October 20, 2025, which contained the same visuals as the viral image. The report link and screenshot are provided below.
According to the NDTV report, a fire broke out onboard the Cameroon-flagged LPG tanker MV Falcon following an explosion near the coast of Aden, Yemen. The incident involved 23 Indian crew members, who were rescued safely. The incident occurred on October 18, 2025, at around 07:00 UTC, when the vessel was sailing approximately 113 nautical miles southeast of Aden while heading towards Djibouti. Following the explosion, the vessel went adrift and around 15% of the ship was engulfed in flames. Further verification through keyword searches led us to an India Today report published on October 20, 2025, which also confirmed that the MV Falcon caught fire after an explosion off the coast of Aden, Yemen. The report stated that all 23 Indian crew members onboard were rescued. The report also mentioned that authorities had initiated an research into the incident and ruled out speculation that the explosion was caused by a Houthi attack. The report link and screenshot are provided below.
Conclusion
Our research found that the viral claim is misleading. The image being shared as proof of an Iranian missile strike on an India-bound LPG tanker is actually from an unrelated incident that occurred in October 2025. The image shows the fire that broke out onboard the Cameroon-flagged LPG tanker MV Falcon near Aden, Yemen, following an explosion. The old image is being circulated with a false narrative linking it to Iran and India.
CyberPeace | Automotive Cybersecurity & Digital Forensics
Introduction
After a crash, the story usually comes from the driver, a witness or a police report. But a modern vehicle can leave another version behind - a digital one. An Event Data Recorder (EDR), commonly called a car's black box, can preserve selected information from the seconds around a crash. NHTSA describes EDRs as recording vehicle dynamics, driver inputs, crash characteristics, restraint status and some post-crash information.[1] The exact fields depend on the vehicle. A black box is not a magical device that records everything; it is one evidence source inside a much larger vehicle.
A modern vehicle can also contain safety controllers, diagnostic interfaces, ADAS, telematics and software-update systems. For an investigator, the question is what evidence can be linked to the EDR and what that combined record can actually support.
What Is Actually in the Black Box?
An EDR is best understood as a short event record, not a continuous driving diary. Depending on the vehicle and its configuration, forensic extraction may reveal items such as speed, acceleration, delta-V, engine RPM, throttle position, brake status, steering input, ABS or stability-control activity, seat-belt status and airbag or restraint events. NHTSA's published EDR material shows that data elements can include longitudinal and lateral acceleration, delta-V, vehicle speed, engine speed, throttle, service-brake status, roll/pitch/yaw information and steering input.[2] Do not overread the data: A field that exists in one model should not automatically be assumed to exist in another. A forensic report must identify exactly which module and fields were available and actually recovered.
What Can a Forensic Examination Recover?
A Brake Failure Example
Consider a driver who reports: “I pressed the brake, but nothing happened.” The statement should be preserved, but a forensic investigation should test it. Was brake status captured? What was the speed before the event? Did ABS activate? What were the acceleration and delta-V patterns? Were there relevant fault codes? Was the vehicle recently repaired or updated? Suppose the recovered records show a brake input, ABS activity and a change in vehicle speed before impact. That does not prove the brakes were mechanically perfect. It does, however, make the sentence “nothing happened” too simple. Conversely, a relevant fault appearing just before the event may give investigators a stronger lead. The important part is the comparison: human account, vehicle record, physical evidence and technical history should be examined together.
Smart Vehicles, Digital Evidence and Cybersecurity Investigation
A connected vehicle can communicate through cellular networks, Bluetooth, Wi-Fi, mobile applications, workshop tools and cloud services. If unusual activity appears around a safety-critical incident, investigators may need to look beyond the EDR. Useful questions include:
• Was there unusual diagnostic or service activity before the incident?
• Was a software update or configuration change recently applied?
• Do timestamps from different modules line up, or is there clock drift?
• Can the extracted record be tied back to the original vehicle and module?
• Is there a non-cyber explanation - such as a hardware fault or software defect - that fits the evidence better?
The mindset matters: A cyberattack should be a conclusion supported by evidence, not the default explanation for strange vehicle behaviour.
The Forensic View: From Data to Evidence
Automotive forensics is not simply plugging in a tool and exporting a report. The investigator should document the vehicle identity, module involved, extraction method, tool version, acquisition time and evidence-preservation steps. The goal is to make the work repeatable and defensible.
• Identify the relevant modules and evidence sources.
• Preserve the vehicle and extracted data against unnecessary alteration.
• Acquire data using a documented and appropriate method.
• Validate provenance, integrity, timestamps and completeness.
• Correlate EDR, diagnostics, software history, connected records and physical evidence.
• Report both findings and uncertainty.
A useful forensic rule: “Recorded” does not mean “proven.” Evidence becomes persuasive when its source, integrity and context are clear.
What the Law and Standards Are Changing
India is moving toward a more formal automotive cybersecurity lifecycle. IS-189 focuses on vehicle cybersecurity and the Cyber Security Management System (CSMS), while AIS-190 deals with software updates and the Software Update Management System (SUMS).[4][5] The wider statutory and type-approval framework is provided by the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 and the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. For vehicle prototypes, Rule 126 provides for testing and approval by authorized testing agencies.[6][7]
In June 2026, the Ministry of Road Transport and Highways (MoRTH) came out with draft G.S.R. 503(E). The draft proposes new CMVR Rules 125-T and 125-U covering cybersecurity and software-update requirements. Since G.S.R. 503(E) is still a draft notification, its proposed requirements and the dates from which they may apply should be verified with the latest final notification before treating them as applicable law.[8]
At the international level, UN Regulation No. 155 addresses vehicle cybersecurity, while UN Regulation No. 156 covers software updates and their management.[9][10] This matters to forensics because lifecycle cybersecurity creates an expectation that manufacturers should be able to understand and manage security risks over time. In other words, logs, software-state information, vulnerability records and incident evidence can become part of the security story, not merely post-incident paperwork.
The Real Takeaway
The black box is valuable because it can reduce guesswork. It may tell us how fast the vehicle was moving, whether the driver applied the brake, how the vehicle responded, and what certain safety systems were doing around the event. But it rarely answers the whole case on its own. The strongest investigation is built by joining several pieces: EDR data, diagnostics, software context, connected-system evidence and what was found at the crash scene.
For cybersecurity professionals, the lesson is simple: a secure vehicle should not only resist attacks. It should also leave trustworthy evidence when something goes wrong. Good access controls, reliable timestamps and careful evidence handling help turn “something failed” into a defensible explanation.
Conclusion
The phrase “car black box” sounds simple, but the evidence behind it is not. An EDR can preserve a small but valuable window into a crash. During forensic examination, investigators may also be able to recover diagnostic, safety-system, software and connected-vehicle information, depending on the vehicle and what has been retained. The job is not to collect the largest possible amount of data. It is to collect the right data, preserve it properly and understand what each record can - and cannot - prove.
That is where automotive cybersecurity and digital forensics meet. As vehicles become more connected and software-driven, the ability to reconstruct an incident becomes part of security itself.
References
1. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Event Data Recorder (EDR) overview and research resources.
2. NHTSA, Use of Event Data Recorder (EDR) Technology for Highway Crash Data Analysis.
3. NHTSA, Light-Vehicle Event Data Recorder Technologies Update.
4. Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI), AIS-189, Approval of Vehicles with Regards to Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System, April 2024.
5. Automotive Research Association of India (ARAI), AIS-190, Approval of Vehicles with Regards to Software Update and Software Update Management System, April 2024.
6. Government of India, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988.
7. Government of India, Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, Rule 126.
8. Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, G.S.R. 503(E), 17 June 2026, draft Central Motor Vehicles (Amendment) Rules concerning cybersecurity and software updates.
9. UNECE, UN Regulation No. 155, Cyber Security and Cyber Security Management System.
10. UNECE, UN Regulation No. 156, Software Update and Software Update Management System.
11. NIST, SP 800-86, Guide to Integrating Forensic Techniques into Incident Response.
Executive Summary:
A viral video circulating on social media that appears to be deliberately misleading and manipulative is shown to have been done by comedian Samay Raina casually making a lighthearted joke about actress Rekha in the presence of host Amitabh Bachchan which left him visibly unsettled while shooting for an episode of Kaun Banega Crorepati (KBC) Influencer Special. The joke pointed to the gossip and rumors of unspoken tensions between the two Bollywood Legends. Our research has ruled out that the video is artificially manipulated and reflects a non genuine content. However, the specific joke in the video does not appear in the original KBC episode. This incident highlights the growing misuse of AI technology in creating and spreading misinformation, emphasizing the need for increased public vigilance and awareness in verifying online information.
Claim:
The claim in the video suggests that during a recent "Influencer Special" episode of KBC, Samay Raina humorously asked Amitabh Bachchan, "What do you and a circle have in common?" and then delivered the punchline, "Neither of you and circle have Rekha (line)," playing on the Hindi word "rekha," which means 'line'.ervicing routes between Amritsar, Chandigarh, Delhi, and Jaipur. This assertion is accompanied by images of a futuristic aircraft, implying that such technology is currently being used to transport commercial passengers.
Fact Check:
To check the genuineness of the claim, the whole Influencer Special episode of Kaun Banega Crorepati (KBC) which can also be found on the Sony Set India YouTube channel was carefully reviewed. Our analysis proved that no part of the episode had comedian Samay Raina cracking a joke on actress Rekha. The technical analysis using Hive moderator further found that the viral clip is AI-made.
Conclusion:
A viral video on the Internet that shows Samay Raina making a joke about Rekha during KBC was released and completely AI-generated and false. This poses a serious threat to manipulation online and that makes it all the more important to place a fact-check for any news from credible sources before putting it out. Promoting media literacy is going to be key to combating misinformation at this time, with the danger of misuse of AI-generated content.
- Claim: Fake AI Video: Samay Raina’s Rekha Joke Goes Viral
- Claimed On: X (Formally known as Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
