RUMOUR WAR ERUPTS ONLINE AFTER DELHI PROTESTS AS POLICE REMOVE 300 POSTS AND THREATEN LEGAL ACTION
October 12, 2026
Delhi Police has removed approximately 300 social media posts allegedly spreading rumours or attempting to provoke public unrest amid demonstrations against Chief Election Commissioner Gyanesh Kumar, while warning of strict legal action against accounts circulating fabricated claims about the security situation in the national capital.
The latest intervention followed the circulation of a social media post claiming that police had opened fire at a rally led by Congress leader Rahul Gandhi, killing five party workers. The post allegedly urged people to take to the streets and block Delhi, claiming that the situation was deteriorating and tensions were escalating.
Delhi Police rejected the claim and warned the account responsible against spreading what it described as misinformation. In a statement posted on X, the police identified the handle @indiantiwari01 and alleged that it had a documented history of sharing doctored media, old footage and fabricated narratives intended to mislead the public.
“Do not fall for or amplify this rumour,” the police said, warning that the deliberate circulation of malicious misinformation was punishable by law and that strict legal action would be initiated against the account.
The police action forms part of a wider monitoring exercise undertaken in response to demonstrations in Delhi over allegations of electoral irregularities and demands for Kumar’s resignation. Officers are scanning social media platforms to identify fabricated content, misleading claims and posts that could potentially disturb public order. Police sources said approximately 300 posts had been taken down as part of these efforts, while the authorities had also approached X seeking the removal of objectionable and allegedly misleading material connected with the protests.
The crackdown on online misinformation follows a separate case in which Delhi Police arrested a 24-year-old man, Nadeem Ahmed, for allegedly using artificial intelligence tools to create and circulate a fabricated video depicting a police officer sexually harassing a woman journalist during a protest against the chief election commissioner.
According to police, the video falsely portrayed a police officer behaving in an objectionable manner. The case is being investigated separately from allegations of sexual harassment levelled against police personnel by women journalists, a distinction that remains important amid the wider controversy surrounding the handling of demonstrators and media workers.
The two developments highlight the competing challenges confronting authorities during periods of intense political mobilisation: investigating allegations of misconduct while preventing fabricated material from being presented as genuine evidence or used to provoke further unrest. The circulation of false claims about deaths at a political rally can generate fear, inflame tensions and encourage people to assemble on the basis of information that has not been verified.
At the same time, the wider dispute over the treatment of protesters and journalists has made credibility particularly important. Allegations concerning police conduct require appropriate investigation, while material presented as evidence must be examined carefully to establish whether it is authentic. The existence of fabricated content does not, by itself, resolve separate complaints about the conduct of law-enforcement personnel.
Delhi Police has maintained that its online monitoring operation is intended to identify misleading claims and prevent disturbances. The authorities have warned that individuals who deliberately circulate fabricated narratives could face legal consequences, while efforts to remove objectionable content continue.
As tensions surrounding the demonstrations persist, the battle over information has become an additional front in the dispute. With hundreds of posts reportedly removed and a separate investigation under way into an alleged AI-generated video, the authorities are seeking to contain the spread of false claims, while the wider controversy over electoral transparency, protest restrictions and police conduct remains unresolved.
