#FactCheck! Viral Image Claiming Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma Visited Kedarnath Is AI-Generated
A photo featuring Indian cricketers Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma is being widely shared on social media. In the image, both players are seen holding a Shivling, with the Kedarnath temple visible in the background. Users sharing the image claim that Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma recently visited Kedarnath.
However, CyberPeace Foundation’s investigation found the claim to be false. Our verification established that the viral image is not real but has been created using Artificial Intelligence (AI) and is being circulated with a misleading narrative.
The Claim
An Instagram user shared the viral image on December 22, 2025, with the caption stating that Rohit Sharma and Virat Kohli are in Kedarnath. The post has since been widely reshared by other users, who assumed the image to be authentic. Link, archive link, screenshot:
Fact Check
On closely examining the viral image, the Desk noticed visual inconsistencies suggesting that it may be AI-generated. To verify this, the image was scanned using the AI detection tool HIVE Moderation. According to the results, the image was found to be 99 per cent AI-generated.
Further verification was conducted using another AI detection tool, Sightengine. The analysis revealed that the image was 93 per cent likely to be AI-generated, reinforcing the findings from the previous tool.
Conclusion
CyberPeace Foundation’s research confirms that the viral image claiming Virat Kohli and Rohit Sharma visited Kedarnath is fabricated. The image has been generated using AI technology and is being falsely shared on social media as a real photograph.
Related Blogs
Introduction
“an intermediary, on whose computer resource the information is stored, hosted or published, upon receiving actual knowledge in the form of an order by a court of competent jurisdiction or on being notified by the Appropriate Government or its agency under clause (b) of sub-section (3) of section 79 of the Act, shall not , which is prohibited under any law for the time being in force in relation to the interest of the sovereignty and integrity of India; security of the State; friendly relations with foreign States; public order; decency or morality; in relation to contempt of court; defamation; incitement to an offence relating to the above, or any information which is prohibited under any law for the time being in force”
Law grows by confronting its absences, it heals itself through its own gaps. The most recent notification from MeitY, G.S.R. 775(E) dated October 22, 2025, is an illustration of that self-correction. On November 15, 2025, the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Amendment Rules, 2025, will come into effect. They accomplish two crucial things: they restrict who can use "actual knowledge” to initiate takedown and require senior-level scrutiny of those directives. By doing this, they maintain genuine security requirements while guiding India’s content governance system towards more transparent due process.
When Regulation Learns Restraint
To better understand the jurisprudence of revision, one must need to understand that Regulation, in its truest form, must know when to pause. The 2025 amendment marks that rare moment when the government chooses precision over power, when regulation learns restraint. The amendment revises Rule 3(1)(d) of the 2021 Rules. Social media sites, hosting companies, and other digital intermediaries are still required to take action within 36 hours of receiving “actual knowledge” that a piece of content is illegal (e.g. poses a threat to public order, sovereignty, decency, or morality). However, “actual knowledge” now only occurs in the following situations:
(i) a court order from a court of competent jurisdiction, or
(ii) a reasoned written intimation from a duly authorised government officer not below Joint Secretary rank (or equivalent)
The authorised authority in matters involving the police “must not be below the rank of Deputy Inspector General of Police (DIG)”. This creates a well defined, senior-accountable channel in place of a diffuse trigger.
There are two more new structural guardrails. The Rules first establish a monthly assessment of all takedown notifications by a Secretary-level officer of the relevant government to test necessity, proportionality, and compliance with India’s safe harbour provision under Section 79(3) of the IT Act. Second, in order for platforms to act precisely rather than in an expansive manner, takedown requests must be accompanied by legal justification, a description of the illegal act, and precise URLs or identifiers. The cumulative result of these guardrails is that each removal has a proportionality check and a paper trail.
Due Process as the Law’s Conscience
Indian jurisprudence has been debating what constitutes “actual knowledge” for over a decade. The Supreme Court in Shreya Singhal (2015) connected an intermediary’s removal obligation to notifications from official channels or court orders rather than vague notice. But over time, that line became hazy due to enforcement practices and some court rulings, raising concerns about over-removal and safe-harbour loss under Section 79(3). Even while more recent decisions questioned the “reasonable efforts” of intermediaries, the 2025 amendment institutionally pays homage to Shreya Singhal’s ethos by refocusing “actual knowledge” on formal reviewable communications from senior state actors or judges.
The amendment also introduces an internal constitutionalism to executive orders by mandating monthly audits at the Secretary level. The state is required to re-justify its own orders on a rolling basis, evaluating them against proportionality and necessity, which are criteria that Indian courts are increasingly requesting for speech restrictions. Clearer triggers, better logs, and less vague “please remove” communications that previously left compliance teams in legal limbo are the results for intermediaries.
The Court’s Echo in the Amendment
The essence of this amendment is echoed in Karnataka High Court’s Ruling on Sahyog Portal, a government portal used to coordinate takedown orders under Section 79(3)(b), was constitutional. The HC rejected X’s (formerly Twitter’s) appeal contesting the legitimacy of the portal in September. The business had claimed that by giving nodal officers the authority to issue takedown orders without court review, the portal permitted arbitrary content removals. The court disagreed, holding that the officers’ acts were in accordance with Section 79 (3)(b) and that they were “not dropping from the air but emanating from statutes.” The amendment turns compliance into conscience by conforming to the Sahyog Portal verdict, reiterating that due process is the moral grammar of governance rather than just a formality.
Conclusion: The Necessary Restlessness of Law
Law cannot afford stillness; it survives through self doubt and reinvention. The 2025 amendment, too, is not a destination, it’s a pause before the next question, a reminder that justice breathes through revision. As befits a constitutional democracy, India’s path to content governance has been combative and iterative. The next rule making cycle has been sharpened by the stays split judgments, and strikes down that have resulted from strategic litigation centred on the IT Rules, safe harbour, government fact-checking, and blocking orders. Lessons learnt are reflected in the 2025 amendment: review triumphs over opacity; specificity triumphs over vagueness; and due process triumphs over discretion. A digital republic balances freedom and force in this way.
Sources
- https://pressnews.in/law-and-justice/government-notifies-amendments-to-it-rules-2025-strengthening-intermediary-obligations/
- https://www.meity.gov.in/static/uploads/2025/10/90dedea70a3fdfe6d58efb55b95b4109.pdf
- https://www.pib.gov.in/PressReleasePage.aspx?PRID=2181719
- https://www.scobserver.in/journal/x-relies-on-shreya-singhal-in-arbitrary-content-blocking-case-in-karnataka-hc/
- https://www.medianama.com/2025/10/223-content-takedown-rules-online-platforms-36-hr-deadline-officer-rank/#:~:text=It%20specifies%20that%20government%20officers,Deputy%20Inspector%20General%20of%20Police%E2%80%9D.
Executive Summary:
Recently, a viral social media post alleged that the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC) had increased ticket prices following the BJP’s victory in the Delhi Legislative Assembly elections. After thorough research and verification, we have found this claim to be misleading and entirely baseless. Authorities have asserted that no fare hike has been declared.
Claim:
Viral social media posts have claimed that the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC) increased metro fares following the BJP's victory in the Delhi Legislative Assembly elections.
Fact Check:
After thorough research, we conclude that the claims regarding a fare hike by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC) following the BJP’s victory in the Delhi Legislative Assembly elections are misleading. Our review of DMRC’s official website and social media handles found no mention of any fare increase.Furthermore, the official X (formerly Twitter) handle of DMRC has also clarified that no such price hike has been announced. We urge the public to rely on verified sources for accurate information and refrain from spreading misinformation.
Conclusion:
Upon examining the alleged fare hike, it is evident that the increase pertains to Bengaluru, not Delhi. To verify this, we reviewed the official website of Bangalore Metro Rail Corporation Limited (BMRCL) and cross-checked the information with appropriate evidence, including relevant images. Our findings confirm that no fare hike has been announced by the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. (DMRC).
- Claim: Delhi Metro price Hike after BJP’s victory in election
- Claimed On: X (Formerly Known As Twitter)
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
Executive Summary:
A viral video (archive link) claims General Upendra Dwivedi, Chief of Army Staff (COAS), admitted to losing six Air Force jets and 250 soldiers during clashes with Pakistan. Verification revealed the footage is from an IIT Madras speech, with no such statement made. AI detection confirmed parts of the audio were artificially generated.
Claim:
The claim in question is that General Upendra Dwivedi, Chief of Army Staff (COAS), admitted to losing six Indian Air Force jets and 250 soldiers during recent clashes with Pakistan.
Fact Check:
Upon conducting a reverse image search on key frames from the video, it was found that the original footage is from IIT Madras, where the Chief of Army Staff (COAS) was delivering a speech. The video is available on the official YouTube channel of ADGPI – Indian Army, published on 9 August 2025, with the description:
“Watch COAS address the faculty and students on ‘Operation Sindoor – A New Chapter in India’s Fight Against Terrorism,’ highlighting it as a calibrated, intelligence-led operation reflecting a doctrinal shift. On the occasion, he also focused on the major strides made in technology absorption and capability development by the Indian Army, while urging young minds to strive for excellence in their future endeavours.”
A review of the full speech revealed no reference to the destruction of six jets or the loss of 250 Army personnel. This indicates that the circulating claim is not supported by the original source and may contribute to the spread of misinformation.
Further using AI Detection tools like Hive Moderation we found that the voice is AI generated in between the lines.
Conclusion:
The claim is baseless. The video is a manipulated creation that combines genuine footage of General Dwivedi’s IIT Madras address with AI-generated audio to fabricate a false narrative. No credible source corroborates the alleged military losses.
- Claim: AI-Generated Audio Falsely Claims COAS Admitted to Loss of 6 Jets and 250 Soldiers
- Claimed On: Social Media
- Fact Check: False and Misleading
