#FactCheck -No Evidence IPS Officer Ajay Pal Sharma Has Been Deputed to West Bengal for Five Years
Executive Summary
Ahead of the final phase of the West Bengal Assembly elections, a claim regarding Uttar Pradesh cadre IPS officer Ajay Pal Sharma began circulating widely on social media. Users claimed that Sharma was being sent to West Bengal on deputation for a period of five years. However, research conducted by CyberPeace Research Wing found the claim to be false. Sources close to the IPS officer confirmed that no such deputation order has been issued so far and that Ajay Pal Sharma is currently posted as Additional Commissioner in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. Ajay Pal Sharma had earlier been deployed as a police observer during the West Bengal elections. During that period, a video of him warning Trinamool Congress candidate Jahangir Khan from the Falta constituency had gone viral on social media.
Claim
Several users on Facebook and X claimed that Ajay Pal Sharma had been transferred to West Bengal for five years under an administrative arrangement involving experienced officers from different states. One Facebook user wrote:“This decision has been taken under an administrative arrangement through which experienced officers are deployed in different states.”
- https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=818902764628152&set=a.296761956842238&type=3
- https://perma.cc/FD8Q-CF7L?type=standard
Fact Check
Our research found that the deputation claim is false. Ajay Pal Sharma is currently serving as Additional Commissioner in Prayagraj, a position he has held since 2025. Further scrutiny revealed that the claim appears to have originated from a parody account on X. On May 4, around 6 PM, the account @abdullah_0mar posted the claim regarding Sharma’s alleged five-year deputation to Bengal. However, in the comments section, the user later clarified that the post was intended as satire.
We also reviewed several news reports regarding Ajay Pal Sharma’s role during the West Bengal elections. Reports confirmed that the Election Commission had deployed him as a police observer in South 24 Parganas district during the polls. However, none of the reports mentioned any five-year transfer or deputation to West Bengal.
Conclusion
The viral claim is false. No official order has been issued regarding IPS officer Ajay Pal Sharma’s deputation to West Bengal for five years. Sources close to the officer confirmed that he continues to serve as Additional Commissioner in Prayagraj, Uttar Pradesh. Sharma had only been deputed as a police observer during the West Bengal Assembly elections, during which a video of him warning TMC candidate Jahangir Khan went viral online.
Related Blogs
Executive Summary
A video circulating on social media claims that during a summit in Beijing, Donald Trump was seen peeking into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s “private notebook” while Xi briefly stepped away. However, a fact-check by CyberPeace Research Wing found the claim to be baseless. A review of the full event footage clearly shows that the folder in question belonged to Donald Trump himself, not Xi Jinping. The viral interpretation is therefore misleading.
Claim
An X user shared the clip alleging, “Trump caught sneaking a peek at Xi Jinping’s private notebook during a Beijing banquet while Xi stepped away.”
Fact Check
A longer version of the video, shared by NBC News on May 14, shows the state banquet held at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing. Around the 1-minute-50-second mark, Xi Jinping, seated to Trump’s left, gets up and walks to the podium. The viral clip follows shortly after, showing Trump opening the folder placed to his left and flipping through its pages.
The White House also uploaded the full footage on its official YouTube channel, showing wider, uninterrupted shots of the event. Around the two-minute mark, the announcer says, “And now a toast by President Xi,” after which Xi Jinping stands up. Immediately after, Trump is seen opening the folder on his left and reading from it.
Later in the video, around the 12-minute mark, when Xi returns to his seat, Trump is seen standing up, taking the folder with him to the podium, turning pages, and reading from it. The same sequence can also be seen in the NBC News footage at around 11 minutes and 50 seconds. This clearly indicates that the folder belonged to the U.S. President and not Xi Jinping, and that Trump was not peeking into any private notebook. Another key detail is the embossed emblem on the folder, which closely resembles the Seal of the President of the United States. The American bald eagle, the national bird of the United States, is clearly visible at the centre. A comparison between the viral screenshot and the official seal shows they are nearly identical.
Conclusion
The viral claim is misleading and taken out of context. A detailed review of the full footage, including official recordings from NBC News and the White House, clearly shows that the folder in question belonged to Donald Trump and not Chinese President Xi Jinping. At multiple points in the video, Trump is seen opening, handling, and reading from the same folder, including while Xi Jinping is away from his seat and later after he returns. The visual evidence from the event also supports this conclusion. The embossed seal on the folder matches the official Seal of the President of the United States, further confirming that it was part of Trump’s official briefing material and not any private document belonging to Xi Jinping. Taken together, the full sequence of events and official video sources make it clear that the viral narrative has been incorrectly framed. There is no evidence to suggest that Trump was peeking into Xi Jinping’s personal notebook.
Introduction
In today’s time, everything is online, and the world is interconnected. Cases of data breaches and cyberattacks have been a reality for various organisations and industries, In the recent case (of SAS), Scandinavian Airlines experienced a cyberattack that resulted in the exposure of customer details, highlighting the critical importance of preventing customer privacy. The incident is a wake-up call for Airlines and businesses to evaluate their cyber security measures and learn valuable lessons to safeguard customers’ data. In this blog, we will explore the incident and discuss the strategies for protecting customers’ privacy in this age of digitalisation.
Analysing the backdrop
The incident has been a shocker for the aviation industry, SAS Scandinavian Airlines has been a victim of a cyberattack that compromised consumer data. Let’s understand the motive of cyber crooks and the technique they used :
Motive Behind the Attack: Understanding the reasons that may have driven the criminals is critical to comprehending the context of the Scandinavian Airlines cyber assault. Financial gain, geopolitical conflicts, activism, or personal vendettas are common motivators for cybercriminals. Identifying the purpose of the assault can provide insight into the attacker’s aims and the possible impact on both the targeted organisation and its consumers. Understanding the attack vector and strategies used by cyber attackers reveals the amount of complexity and possible weaknesses in an organisation’s cybersecurity defences. Scandinavian Airlines’ cyber assault might have included phishing, spyware, ransomware, or exploiting software weaknesses. Analysing these tactics allows organisations to strengthen their security against similar assaults.
Impact on Victims: The Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) cyber attack victims, including customers and individuals related to the company, have suffered substantial consequences. Data breaches and cyber-attack have serious consequences due to the leak of personal information.
1)Financial Losses and Fraudulent Activities: One of the most immediate and upsetting consequences of a cyber assault is the possibility of financial loss. Exposed personal information, such as credit card numbers, can be used by hackers to carry out illegal activities such as unauthorised transactions and identity theft. Victims may experience financial difficulties and the need to spend time and money resolving these concerns.
2)Concerns about privacy and personal security: A breach of personal data can significantly impact the privacy and personal security of victims. The disclosed information, including names, addresses, and contact information, might be exploited for nefarious reasons, such as targeted phishing or physical harassment. Victims may have increased anxiety about their safety and privacy, which can interrupt their everyday life and create mental pain.
3) Reputational Damage and Trust Issues: The cyber attack may cause reputational harm to persons linked with Scandinavian Airlines, such as workers or partners. The breach may diminish consumers’ and stakeholders’ faith in the organisation, leading to a bad view of its capacity to protect personal information. This lack of trust might have long-term consequences for the impacted people’s professional and personal relationships.
4) Emotional Stress and Psychological Impact: The psychological impact of a cyber assault can be severe. Fear, worry, and a sense of violation induced by having personal information exposed can create emotional stress and psychological suffering. Victims may experience emotions of vulnerability, loss of control, and distrust toward digital platforms, potentially harming their overall quality of life.
5) Time and Effort Required for Remediation: Addressing the repercussions of a cyber assault demands significant time and effort from the victims. They may need to call financial institutions, reset passwords, monitor accounts for unusual activity, and use credit monitoring services. Resolving the consequences of a data breach may be a difficult and time-consuming process, adding stress and inconvenience to the victims’ lives.
6) Secondary Impacts: The impacts of an online attack could continue beyond the immediate implications. Future repercussions for victims may include trouble acquiring credit or insurance, difficulties finding future work, and continuous worry about exploiting their personal information. These secondary effects can seriously affect victims’ financial and general well-being.
Apart from this, the trust lost would take time to rebuild.
Takeaways from this attack
The cyber-attack on Scandinavian Airlines (SAS) is a sharp reminder of cybercrime’s ever-present and increasing menace. This event provides crucial insights that businesses and people may use to strengthen cybersecurity defences. In the lessons that were learned from the Scandinavian Airlines cyber assault and examine the steps that may be taken to improve cybersecurity and reduce future risks. Some of the key points that can be considered are as follows:
Proactive Risk Assessment and Vulnerability Management: The cyber assault on Scandinavian Airlines emphasises the significance of regular risk assessments and vulnerability management. Organisations must proactively identify and fix possible system and network vulnerabilities. Regular security audits, penetration testing, and vulnerability assessments can help identify flaws before bad actors exploit them.
Strong security measures and best practices: To guard against cyber attacks, it is necessary to implement effective security measures and follow cybersecurity best practices. Lessons from the Scandinavian Airlines cyber assault emphasise the importance of effective firewalls, up-to-date antivirus software, secure setups, frequent software patching, and strong password rules. Using multi-factor authentication and encryption technologies for sensitive data can also considerably improve security.
Employee Training and Awareness: Human mistake is frequently a big component in cyber assaults. Organisations should prioritise employee training and awareness programs to educate employees about phishing schemes, social engineering methods, and safe internet practices. Employees may become the first line of defence against possible attacks by cultivating a culture of cybersecurity awareness.
Data Protection and Privacy Measures: Protecting consumer data should be a key priority for businesses. Lessons from the Scandinavian Airlines cyber assault emphasise the significance of having effective data protection measures, such as encryption and access limits. Adhering to data privacy standards and maintaining safe data storage and transfer can reduce the risks connected with data breaches.
Collaboration and Information Sharing: The Scandinavian Airlines cyber assault emphasises the need for collaboration and information sharing among the cybersecurity community. Organisations should actively share threat intelligence, cooperate with industry partners, and stay current on developing cyber threats. Sharing information and experiences can help to build the collective defence against cybercrime.
Conclusion
The Scandinavian Airlines cyber assault is a reminder that cybersecurity must be a key concern for organisations and people. Organisations may improve their cybersecurity safeguards, proactively discover vulnerabilities, and respond effectively to prospective attacks by learning from this occurrence and adopting the lessons learned. Building a strong cybersecurity culture, frequently upgrading security practices, and encouraging cooperation within the cybersecurity community are all critical steps toward a more robust digital world. We may aim to keep one step ahead of thieves and preserve our important information assets by constantly monitoring and taking proactive actions.
.webp)
Introduction
Big Tech has been pushing back against regulatory measures, particularly regarding data handling practices. X Corp (formerly Twitter) has taken a prominent stance in India. The platform has filed a petition against the Central and State governments, challenging content-blocking orders and opposing the Center’s newly launched Sahyog portal. The X Corp has furthermore labelled the Sahyog Portal as a 'censorship portal' that enables government agencies to issue blocking orders using a standardized template.
The key regulations governing the tech space in India include the IT Act of 2000, IT Rules 2021 and 2023 (which stress platform accountability and content moderation), and the DPDP Act 2023, which intersects with personal data governance. This petition by the X Corp raises concerns for digital freedom, platform accountability, and the evolving regulatory frameworks in India.
Elon Musk vs Indian Government: Key Issues at Stake
The 2021 IT Rules, particularly Rule 3(1)(d) of Part II, outline intermediaries' obligations regarding ‘Content Takedowns’. Intermediaries must remove or disable access to unlawful content within 36 hours of receiving a court order or government notification. Notably, the rules do not require government takedown requests to be explicitly in writing, raising concerns about potential misuse.
X’s petition also focuses on the Sahyog Portal, a government-run platform that allows various agencies and state police to request content removal directly. They contend that the failure to comply with such orders can expose intermediaries' officers to prosecution. This has sparked controversy, with platforms like Elon Musk’s X arguing that such provisions grant the government excessive control, potentially undermining free speech and fostering undue censorship.
The broader implications include geopolitical tensions, potential business risks for big tech companies, and significant effects on India's digital economy, user engagement, and platform governance. Balancing regulatory compliance with digital rights remains a crucial challenge in this evolving landscape.
The Global Context: Lessons from Other Jurisdictions
The ‘EU's Digital Services Act’ establishes a baseline 'notice and takedown' system. According to the Act, hosting providers, including online platforms, must enable third parties to notify them of illegal content, which they must promptly remove to retain their hosting defence. The DSA also mandates expedited removal processes for notifications from trusted flaggers, user suspension for those with frequent violations, and enhanced protections for minors. Additionally, hosting providers have to adhere to specific content removal obligations, including the elimination of terrorist content within one hour and deploying technology to detect known or new CSAM material and remove it.
In contrast to the EU, the US First Amendment protects speech from state interference but does not extend to private entities. Dominant digital platforms, however, significantly influence discourse by moderating content, shaping narratives, and controlling advertising markets. This dual role creates tension as these platforms balance free speech, platform safety, and profitability.
India has adopted a model closer to the EU's approach, emphasizing content moderation to curb misinformation, false narratives, and harmful content. Drawing from the EU's framework, India could establish third-party notification mechanisms, enforce clear content takedown guidelines, and implement detection measures for harmful content like terrorist material and CSAM within defined timelines. This would balance content regulation with platform accountability while aligning with global best practices.
Key Concerns and Policy Debates
As the issue stands, the main concerns that arise are:
- The need for transparency in government orders for takedowns, the reasons and a clear framework for why they are needed and the guidelines for doing so.
- The need for balancing digital freedom with national security and the concerns that arise out of it for tech companies. Essentially, the role platforms play in safeguarding the democratic values enshrined in the Constitution of India.
- This court ruling by the Karnataka HC will have the potential to redefine the principles upon which the intermediary guidelines function under the Indian laws.
Potential Outcomes and the Way Forward
While we wait for the Hon’ble Court’s directives and orders in response to the filed suit, while the court's decision could favour either side or lead to a negotiated resolution, the broader takeaway is the necessity of collaborative policymaking that balances governmental oversight with platform accountability. This debate underscores the pressing need for a structured and transparent regulatory framework for content moderation. Additionally, this case also highlights the importance of due process in content regulation and the need for legal clarity for tech companies operating in India. Ultimately, a consultative and principles-based approach will be key to ensuring a fair and open digital ecosystem.
References
- https://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/elon-musks-x-sues-union-government-over-alleged-censorship-and-it-act-violations/article69352961.ece
- https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/elon-musk-s-x-sues-union-government-over-alleged-censorship-and-it-act-violations-101742463516588.html
- https://www.financialexpress.com/life/technology-explainer-why-has-x-accused-govt-of-censorship-3788648/
- https://thelawreporters.com/elon-musk-s-x-sues-indian-government-over-alleged-censorship-and-it-act-violations
- https://www.linklaters.com/en/insights/blogs/digilinks/2023/february/the-eu-digital-services-act---a-new-era-for-online-harms-and-intermediary-liability
