Sensitive content

This media may contain sensitive content.

Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

Verification x

Princess Mia

5,394 subscribers

64,064 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Verification x

Verification x

Jain’s world

13,899 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Verification video x

Sensitive content

Verification video x

YasminArches

37,418 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

My x verification ✅

My x verification ✅

mis_niraya

18,169 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Hello, X! There goes my verification 😊

Hello, X! There goes my verification 😊

Juliete’s feet ✨

14,730 görüntüleme • 2 yıl önce

Updated verification. This is my ONLY account x

Updated verification. This is my ONLY account x

Princess Mia

35,316 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

gimme tips to overcome X age verification please

Sensitive content

gimme tips to overcome X age verification please

MyGian ✨| TORREMOLINOS 13/18 August

49,075 görüntüleme • 12 gün önce

My X Verification Video You've Been Waiting For ✨

Sensitive content

My X Verification Video You've Been Waiting For ✨

princessruhani

180,568 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

Verification for my x profile. These feet are trained man-hunters ⚠️

Prinzessin

96,963 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

My verification video. Yes I really am this hot. This is my only X account. No excuses now piggy’s 😈

My verification video. Yes I really am this hot. This is my only X account. No excuses now piggy’s 😈

Goddess Raven

27,656 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

updated verification video STOP ASKING AM I REAL 😒 duh. I’m verified on here & I had this acc since 2021…. This is my only X account

updated verification video STOP ASKING AM I REAL 😒 duh. I’m verified on here & I had this acc since 2021…. This is my only X account

RiRi 💦🍑 No Collabs 🙅🏽‍♀️

42,861 görüntüleme • 9 ay önce

Submit your token for verification in seconds. Help keep traders safe from impostors Visit to do your part Just enter your project's CA and X, then monitor your status

Submit your token for verification in seconds. Help keep traders safe from impostors Visit to do your part Just enter your project's CA and X, then monitor your status

Jupiter

90,230 görüntüleme • 11 ay önce

Earn 40 Humanity Points by connecting your real accounts (X, Discord, Telegram, GitHub, Uber, ENS, etc.). Once you reach 40 points, mint your Rayls Authena NFT on Base. This NFT serves as your onchain Proof-of-Humanity verification for Rayls.

Earn 40 Humanity Points by connecting your real accounts (X, Discord, Telegram, GitHub, Uber, ENS, etc.). Once you reach 40 points, mint your Rayls Authena NFT on Base. This NFT serves as your onchain Proof-of-Humanity verification for Rayls.

Rayls

30,563 görüntüleme • 8 ay önce

We’re excited to announce the Agentic Payment Whitepaper, initiated by interlace.money together with 7 ecosystem partners. This whitepaper defines a shared vision, architecture, and standards for AI‑agent‑driven payments — a critical step toward the emerging Agentic Payment Economy. 🧱 The layers & partners: 🤖 Agent Application – X-Agent 💳 Payment Execution – interlace.money (Initiator) 🔐 Governance & Control – Cobo 🛡️ Trust & Compliance – BlockSec 💵 Stablecoin Settlement – Stable ⛓️ Blockchain Infrastructure – Conflux Network Official 🌊 Liquidity Orchestration & User Access – Bitget Wallet 🩵 🔗 Causal Verification – Hetu The company names above are listed in no particular order. 📄 Expected release: within the next 1–2 months. Stay tuned. #Interlace #AI #agenticpayment

We’re excited to announce the Agentic Payment Whitepaper, initiated by interlace.money together with 7 ecosystem partners. This whitepaper defines a shared vision, architecture, and standards for AI‑agent‑driven payments — a critical step toward the emerging Agentic Payment Economy. 🧱 The layers & partners: 🤖 Agent Application – X-Agent 💳 Payment Execution – interlace.money (Initiator) 🔐 Governance & Control – Cobo 🛡️ Trust & Compliance – BlockSec 💵 Stablecoin Settlement – Stable ⛓️ Blockchain Infrastructure – Conflux Network Official 🌊 Liquidity Orchestration & User Access – Bitget Wallet 🩵 🔗 Causal Verification – Hetu The company names above are listed in no particular order. 📄 Expected release: within the next 1–2 months. Stay tuned. #Interlace #AI #agenticpayment

interlace.money

17,524 görüntüleme • 1 ay önce

🚨 CRYPTO: X TARGETS CRYPTO SCAMS BY AUTO-LOCKING ACCOUNTS POSTING ABOUT CRYPTO FOR THE FIRST TIME Social media platform X is rolling out a new anti-scam measure that will automatically lock any account that mentions cryptocurrency for the first time in its history. Users will need to pass additional verification before being allowed to post again. The feature was confirmed by X Head of Product Nikita Bier, who said it should eliminate 99% of the incentive behind hijacked account crypto scams. The move targets a specific attack pattern where hackers compromise established accounts through phishing emails, then use those accounts to promote scam tokens and fraudulent links. Predictfully founder Benjamin White flagged the issue publicly on April 1 after his own account was hijacked and used to push scam content, with the hacker attempting to extort $4,000 for its return. Bier also called out Google for failing to stop phishing emails at the Gmail level, arguing the tech giant shares responsibility for the attack chain. X has previously attempted to tackle crypto scams through bot purges, API restrictions, and behavioral detection, but hijacked account promotions have remained a persistent problem since the infamous 2020 hack that compromised accounts belonging to Apple, Barack Obama, and Elon Musk.

🚨 CRYPTO: X TARGETS CRYPTO SCAMS BY AUTO-LOCKING ACCOUNTS POSTING ABOUT CRYPTO FOR THE FIRST TIME Social media platform X is rolling out a new anti-scam measure that will automatically lock any account that mentions cryptocurrency for the first time in its history. Users will need to pass additional verification before being allowed to post again. The feature was confirmed by X Head of Product Nikita Bier, who said it should eliminate 99% of the incentive behind hijacked account crypto scams. The move targets a specific attack pattern where hackers compromise established accounts through phishing emails, then use those accounts to promote scam tokens and fraudulent links. Predictfully founder Benjamin White flagged the issue publicly on April 1 after his own account was hijacked and used to push scam content, with the hacker attempting to extort $4,000 for its return. Bier also called out Google for failing to stop phishing emails at the Gmail level, arguing the tech giant shares responsibility for the attack chain. X has previously attempted to tackle crypto scams through bot purges, API restrictions, and behavioral detection, but hijacked account promotions have remained a persistent problem since the infamous 2020 hack that compromised accounts belonging to Apple, Barack Obama, and Elon Musk.

BSCN

65,512 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

bUT WhAt CaN YoU Do WiTh ThoSE PRoOfs ? Here you go: TrustMeBro is a showcase of a mini ZK-ready Bitcoin explorer where anyone can verify transaction and block validity right in their browser, instant, trustless, no middlemen. Think about it like TLS. 99.99% of people browsing the web have no clue how a secure session actually works, but they've all internalised that green lock meaning "you're safe." ZK can be the same. Run a local verification under the hood, flash a simple badge, verified or not, and boom! Starknet tech looking good from here. As I said many times, Bitcoin x STARKs is a math match made in heaven. Won't stop till the whole damn world is proven. One STARK at a time.

bUT WhAt CaN YoU Do WiTh ThoSE PRoOfs ? Here you go: TrustMeBro is a showcase of a mini ZK-ready Bitcoin explorer where anyone can verify transaction and block validity right in their browser, instant, trustless, no middlemen. Think about it like TLS. 99.99% of people browsing the web have no clue how a secure session actually works, but they've all internalised that green lock meaning "you're safe." ZK can be the same. Run a local verification under the hood, flash a simple badge, verified or not, and boom! Starknet tech looking good from here. As I said many times, Bitcoin x STARKs is a math match made in heaven. Won't stop till the whole damn world is proven. One STARK at a time.

abdel

32,110 görüntüleme • 10 ay önce

Humanity verification for Theoriq pre-claim registration is now LIVE on Authena. If you’re eligible for Theoriq’s testnet rewards, you’ll need to complete a quick Proof of Humanity check and earn 40 Humanity Points to qualify. Here’s how it works: - Start at Theoriq’s pre-claim registration page and select "I'm a Testnet User": Connect your wallet to check your eligibility. - If you’re eligible, go to Theoriq’s Authena page: Sign up and start building your Humanity Score by connecting real credentials. - Every credential adds points - X, Discord, Farcaster, TG premium, ENS holder, CEX KYC ZK proofs and more. You only need 40 points to qualify. - Once you hit 40+, mint your Theoriq Authena NFT. - Return to the Theoriq registration page → click Refresh Status. Done. You’re officially human-verified for the pre-claim. Verify & mint now:

Humanity verification for Theoriq pre-claim registration is now LIVE on Authena. If you’re eligible for Theoriq’s testnet rewards, you’ll need to complete a quick Proof of Humanity check and earn 40 Humanity Points to qualify. Here’s how it works: - Start at Theoriq’s pre-claim registration page and select "I'm a Testnet User": Connect your wallet to check your eligibility. - If you’re eligible, go to Theoriq’s Authena page: Sign up and start building your Humanity Score by connecting real credentials. - Every credential adds points - X, Discord, Farcaster, TG premium, ENS holder, CEX KYC ZK proofs and more. You only need 40 points to qualify. - Once you hit 40+, mint your Theoriq Authena NFT. - Return to the Theoriq registration page → click Refresh Status. Done. You’re officially human-verified for the pre-claim. Verify & mint now:

Authena

10,635 görüntüleme • 7 ay önce

📢 ขอเชิญชวนแฟน ๆ มาร่วมฉลองวันเกิดของ ลูกน้ำ อรธารา ในงาน “Looknam30thBirthday🎂” 📅24 MAY 2026 ⏰16.00 - 19.00 😸 60 คน 📍ร้านอาหาร รส‘สุคนธ์ (นวลจันทร์) 🗺 🚨 ประกาศลิงก์ลงทะเบียนวันที่ 19 พฤษภาคม 2569 เวลา 12.00 น. (The registration link will be announced on MAY 19 , 2026, 12 PM at X: PnamCatDom ) หมายเหตุ (Note) 🔹 รายชื่อเรียงลำดับตามความเร็ว และตอบคำถามถูกต้องทุกข้อ (The list is sorted by registration speed and correct answers.) 🔹 เนื่องจากจำนวนที่นั่งมีจำกัด และเพื่อกระจายสิทธิ์ให้แฟนคลับสามารถมีส่วนร่วมได้มากที่สุด แฟนคลับสามารถลงทะเบียนได้เพียง 1 ครั้งเท่านั้น หากพบว่าชื่อซ้ำจะถูกตัดสิทธิ์ทันที (Due to limited seating and to ensure the maximum participation of fans, fans can register only once. Duplicate registrations will be disqualified.) 🔹 ยืนยันสิทธิ์โดยใช้ ชื่อ-นามสกุล ซึ่งจะต้องตรงกับบัตรประชาชน หรือพาสปอร์ตของผู้ที่ลงทะเบียนเท่านั้น (Participation verification requires the full name to match the ID card or passport.) 🔹 สามารถส่งมอบของขวัญได้ที่โต๊ะรับของขวัญหน้างาน (สอบถามข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมได้ทาง DM) ((Gifts can be dropped off at the gift table (DM if you have any inquiries)) 🔹 ค่าใช้จ่ายเพิ่มเติม (เช่น อาหารและเครื่องดื่ม) ผู้เข้าร่วมงานต้องเป็นผู้รับผิดชอบด้วยตัวเอง ((Additional costs (food, drinks and etc.) are to be covered by the participants.)) #namorntaraaa #แงวของพี่น้ำ

📢 ขอเชิญชวนแฟน ๆ มาร่วมฉลองวันเกิดของ ลูกน้ำ อรธารา ในงาน “Looknam30thBirthday🎂” 📅24 MAY 2026 ⏰16.00 - 19.00 😸 60 คน 📍ร้านอาหาร รส‘สุคนธ์ (นวลจันทร์) 🗺 🚨 ประกาศลิงก์ลงทะเบียนวันที่ 19 พฤษภาคม 2569 เวลา 12.00 น. (The registration link will be announced on MAY 19 , 2026, 12 PM at X: PnamCatDom ) หมายเหตุ (Note) 🔹 รายชื่อเรียงลำดับตามความเร็ว และตอบคำถามถูกต้องทุกข้อ (The list is sorted by registration speed and correct answers.) 🔹 เนื่องจากจำนวนที่นั่งมีจำกัด และเพื่อกระจายสิทธิ์ให้แฟนคลับสามารถมีส่วนร่วมได้มากที่สุด แฟนคลับสามารถลงทะเบียนได้เพียง 1 ครั้งเท่านั้น หากพบว่าชื่อซ้ำจะถูกตัดสิทธิ์ทันที (Due to limited seating and to ensure the maximum participation of fans, fans can register only once. Duplicate registrations will be disqualified.) 🔹 ยืนยันสิทธิ์โดยใช้ ชื่อ-นามสกุล ซึ่งจะต้องตรงกับบัตรประชาชน หรือพาสปอร์ตของผู้ที่ลงทะเบียนเท่านั้น (Participation verification requires the full name to match the ID card or passport.) 🔹 สามารถส่งมอบของขวัญได้ที่โต๊ะรับของขวัญหน้างาน (สอบถามข้อมูลเพิ่มเติมได้ทาง DM) ((Gifts can be dropped off at the gift table (DM if you have any inquiries)) 🔹 ค่าใช้จ่ายเพิ่มเติม (เช่น อาหารและเครื่องดื่ม) ผู้เข้าร่วมงานต้องเป็นผู้รับผิดชอบด้วยตัวเอง ((Additional costs (food, drinks and etc.) are to be covered by the participants.)) #namorntaraaa #แงวของพี่น้ำ

LOOKNAM FANCLUB | แงวของพี่น้ำ 🐱

113,286 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

Wicknell Chivayo Offers US$50,000 Reward to Expose Scam Suspect Wicknell Chivayo has offered a US$50,000 cash reward to anyone who can identify the woman featured in the video below. She is believed to be part of an elaborate scam targeting unsuspecting individuals through fake social media accounts impersonating Chivayo on WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter). These impersonators have been harassing users by sending direct messages and luring victims into sending money under the false promise of receiving vehicles or other rewards. In a statement, Chivayo expressed his frustration, saying he is fed up with scammers blatantly using his name for fraud. He posted the following: "These unrepentant CRIMINALS are now using elaborate tactics, deceitfully promising unsuspecting victims that if you send them $30,000, they will receive $100,000 within 24 hours in my name. This is LAUGHABLE to say the least, but very SAD because some people are actually falling for such STUPID and FOOLISH tricks," he said. "The video below is a CLASSIC example of these shameless FRAUDSTERS falsely claiming to have received money from me. 🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️ For the AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, I have NEVER met this woman, I don’t know her, nor would I engage in such clandestine transactions. She is a DISGRACE to other hardworking women and mothers, by trying to make a living out of LIES and DECEIT. I am offering a US$50,000 REWARD to anyone who provides AUTHENTIC information leading to this THIEVING woman’s immediate arrest !!!!" Chivayo went on: "Please note that if you choose to give money to anyone CLAIMING to be me, I bear NO LIABILITY whatsoever for any losses which may result in YOUR FOOLISHNESS...All of my OFFICIAL social media accounts have a VERIFICATION BLUE badge. Report any SUSPICIOUS accounts or activity online or at your NEAREST police station." Zimbabwe Republic Police

Wicknell Chivayo Offers US$50,000 Reward to Expose Scam Suspect Wicknell Chivayo has offered a US$50,000 cash reward to anyone who can identify the woman featured in the video below. She is believed to be part of an elaborate scam targeting unsuspecting individuals through fake social media accounts impersonating Chivayo on WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, and X (formerly Twitter). These impersonators have been harassing users by sending direct messages and luring victims into sending money under the false promise of receiving vehicles or other rewards. In a statement, Chivayo expressed his frustration, saying he is fed up with scammers blatantly using his name for fraud. He posted the following: "These unrepentant CRIMINALS are now using elaborate tactics, deceitfully promising unsuspecting victims that if you send them $30,000, they will receive $100,000 within 24 hours in my name. This is LAUGHABLE to say the least, but very SAD because some people are actually falling for such STUPID and FOOLISH tricks," he said. "The video below is a CLASSIC example of these shameless FRAUDSTERS falsely claiming to have received money from me. 🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️🤦🏽‍♂️ For the AVOIDANCE OF DOUBT, I have NEVER met this woman, I don’t know her, nor would I engage in such clandestine transactions. She is a DISGRACE to other hardworking women and mothers, by trying to make a living out of LIES and DECEIT. I am offering a US$50,000 REWARD to anyone who provides AUTHENTIC information leading to this THIEVING woman’s immediate arrest !!!!" Chivayo went on: "Please note that if you choose to give money to anyone CLAIMING to be me, I bear NO LIABILITY whatsoever for any losses which may result in YOUR FOOLISHNESS...All of my OFFICIAL social media accounts have a VERIFICATION BLUE badge. Report any SUSPICIOUS accounts or activity online or at your NEAREST police station." Zimbabwe Republic Police

𝐂𝐫𝐢𝐦𝐞 𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐜𝐡 𝐙𝐖

75,337 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

WATCH THIS VIDEO CAREFULLY. FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF A VIDEO CURRENTLY BEING CIRCULATED AND SPREAD ON ARAB TELEGRAM CHANNELS (Mor Edge Insight in conjunction with GAZAWOOD - The Pallywood Saga - BACKUP - July 6) What you are about to see is raw footage of an active arrest operation and genuine footage. This clip is currently circulating on Palestinian Telegram channels and is being prepared for wider distribution on X. It follows a familiar pattern of real footage with heavy manipulation and inauthentic audio to create a perception and narrative that doesn’t exist and is not what the footage actually shows. Here is the step-by-step forensic breakdown. The audio track contains multiple sharp “gunshots.” However, frame-by-frame examination shows no muzzle flashes at any point, even in bright daylight where unsuppressed firearms would produce clear, visible bursts. There is also no visible recoil or weapon movement on the individuals holding rifles. The barrels show no suppressors, yet the sounds are relatively clean “pops” rather than the overwhelming cracks expected from unsuppressed fire at that range. The audio of the shots fired are more reminiscent of a children’s toy than a real gunshot. More critically, the visual action is happening at a clear distance across the road, at a distance of an estimated 60-100m away from the camera, yet the gunshots and shouting sound as if recorded right next to the camera. Real distant gunfire would be thinner, more muffled, and accompanied by environmental echoes. This audio was added in post-production. How distance was determined: The white car in the immediate foreground (partially visible on the left) is only 5–10 meters away. The road width and the position of the parked vehicles and people with guns put the core action clearly in the mid-ground, across the full width of the street and shoulder. Reference objects: Standard car lengths (4.5–5m), average adult height (1.7m), and the spacing of streetlights/power poles all support a distance in that 60–100 meter range for the shooters and the SUV. The black SUV drives a noticeable distance across the frame without appearing overly large or close, further confirming it’s not right next to the camera. This distance makes the audio mismatch even more obvious. Real gunfire at 60–100 meters would sound significantly more distant and muted, with clear delay and environmental filtering. The overlaid “cracks” sound like they were recorded (or synthesized) much closer. Summary 1. Real gunshots, especially in an open outdoor environment like this, produce a sharp initial crack (supersonic bullet) followed by a broader report/echo, with significant low-frequency rumble, reverberation off the ground/cars/objects, and environmental decay. These sound more like clean “pop/crack” samples layered on top. 2. They lack the natural variations in volume, timing, or distortion you’d expect from actual firearms in a real chaotic scene (muzzle blast, echoes, distance differences) even with silencers which from that distance you wouldn’t even hear. They feel “pasted in” during editing. 3. The overall audio mix (ambient road noise, car sounds, voices) doesn’t interact naturally with the “shots”, there is no proper masking, reverb bleed, or mic overload you’d get from real loud events captured on the same recording device. Always examine the audio against the visuals, check for continuity errors, and watch how people actually behave when they think no one is watching the performance. Share if you value this kind of detailed verification.

WATCH THIS VIDEO CAREFULLY. FORENSIC ANALYSIS OF A VIDEO CURRENTLY BEING CIRCULATED AND SPREAD ON ARAB TELEGRAM CHANNELS (Mor Edge Insight in conjunction with GAZAWOOD - The Pallywood Saga - BACKUP - July 6) What you are about to see is raw footage of an active arrest operation and genuine footage. This clip is currently circulating on Palestinian Telegram channels and is being prepared for wider distribution on X. It follows a familiar pattern of real footage with heavy manipulation and inauthentic audio to create a perception and narrative that doesn’t exist and is not what the footage actually shows. Here is the step-by-step forensic breakdown. The audio track contains multiple sharp “gunshots.” However, frame-by-frame examination shows no muzzle flashes at any point, even in bright daylight where unsuppressed firearms would produce clear, visible bursts. There is also no visible recoil or weapon movement on the individuals holding rifles. The barrels show no suppressors, yet the sounds are relatively clean “pops” rather than the overwhelming cracks expected from unsuppressed fire at that range. The audio of the shots fired are more reminiscent of a children’s toy than a real gunshot. More critically, the visual action is happening at a clear distance across the road, at a distance of an estimated 60-100m away from the camera, yet the gunshots and shouting sound as if recorded right next to the camera. Real distant gunfire would be thinner, more muffled, and accompanied by environmental echoes. This audio was added in post-production. How distance was determined: The white car in the immediate foreground (partially visible on the left) is only 5–10 meters away. The road width and the position of the parked vehicles and people with guns put the core action clearly in the mid-ground, across the full width of the street and shoulder. Reference objects: Standard car lengths (4.5–5m), average adult height (1.7m), and the spacing of streetlights/power poles all support a distance in that 60–100 meter range for the shooters and the SUV. The black SUV drives a noticeable distance across the frame without appearing overly large or close, further confirming it’s not right next to the camera. This distance makes the audio mismatch even more obvious. Real gunfire at 60–100 meters would sound significantly more distant and muted, with clear delay and environmental filtering. The overlaid “cracks” sound like they were recorded (or synthesized) much closer. Summary 1. Real gunshots, especially in an open outdoor environment like this, produce a sharp initial crack (supersonic bullet) followed by a broader report/echo, with significant low-frequency rumble, reverberation off the ground/cars/objects, and environmental decay. These sound more like clean “pop/crack” samples layered on top. 2. They lack the natural variations in volume, timing, or distortion you’d expect from actual firearms in a real chaotic scene (muzzle blast, echoes, distance differences) even with silencers which from that distance you wouldn’t even hear. They feel “pasted in” during editing. 3. The overall audio mix (ambient road noise, car sounds, voices) doesn’t interact naturally with the “shots”, there is no proper masking, reverb bleed, or mic overload you’d get from real loud events captured on the same recording device. Always examine the audio against the visuals, check for continuity errors, and watch how people actually behave when they think no one is watching the performance. Share if you value this kind of detailed verification.

Mor Edge Insight

23,103 görüntüleme • 16 gün önce

Dear Dr. Sagar Preet Hooda, IPS Director General of Police, Chandigarh DGP Chandigarh Police Subject: Request for intervention regarding FIR No. 44 dated 19-04-2026 registered by East Sector 26 Police Station, Chandigarh 1. I write this letter through X with the sincere hope that it reaches your attention. The present issue concerns FIR No. 44 dated 19-04-2026 registered by East Sector 26 Police Station, Chandigarh against Professor Madhu Kishwar Madhu Purnima Kishwar and a few others under Sections 66C, 66D and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 196, 318, 336(1), 336(3), 336(4), 340, 353 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR was registered on the complaint of one Satinder Singh, who alleged that a video clip was being circulated by various social media users with misleading claims that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was receiving a facial massage from a woman. According to the complaint, several social media accounts amplified this allegedly false narrative. As understood, the complainant further stated that his preliminary verification revealed that the video was originally posted by one Pardeep Kaur Dhillon through Facebook, YouTube and Instagram accounts on 12 April 2026, and that the person in the video was actually Jaspal Singh Sarai, who was apparently receiving a facial massage from a woman. However, even a plain reading of the complaint does not disclose the commission of any offence, much less a cognizable offence. Surprisingly, the police registered the FIR invoking an extraordinary range of provisions relating to identity theft, cheating, forgery, promoting enmity, defamation, public mischief, and even obscenity. 2. Let us briefly examine the applicability of each provision invoked in the FIR: (i) Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalises fraudulent or dishonest use of another person’s electronic signature, password, or unique identification feature. The fundamental question is: whose identity has Professor Madhu Kishwar allegedly stolen? Was it the identity of Satinder Singh? If not, what is his locus standi in lodging such a complaint? If the allegation concerns some other person, has that person complained? In the absence of any such complaint, how is an offence under this section made out? (ii) Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 relates to cheating by personation through a communication device or computer resource. Whom did Professor Madhu Kishwar allegedly impersonate? Who was deceived, and what wrongful gain or loss occurred? Did she impersonate Satinder Singh or any other person? If not, how does the complainant acquire locus standi under this provision? (iii) Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalises publication or transmission of obscene material in electronic form. The complainant himself states that the video was originally posted by Pardeep Kaur Dhillon and depicted Jaspal Singh Sarai receiving a facial massage from a woman. The video, by any objective standard, contains no obscene or lascivious material. Neither individuals were nude, nor was any sexual act depicted. It was merely a professional facial massage. Professor Madhu Kishwar merely reposted the content on X. Therefore, the essential ingredients of Section 67 are entirely absent. (iv) Section 196 of BNS concerns promoting enmity between groups on grounds such as religion, race, language, place of birth, or residence, and acts prejudicial to communal harmony. How does reposting a video of a man receiving a facial massage — even assuming someone believed the man resembled Prime Minister Narendra Modi — amount to promoting enmity between groups or disturbing public harmony? The provision appears wholly inapplicable. (v) Section 318 of BNS deals with the offence of cheating. The essential ingredients of cheating require deception causing wrongful loss, delivery of property, or inducement to act or omit in a manner causing harm. How does reposting a social media video satisfy any of these ingredients? Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Prime Minister Narendra Modi felt personally aggrieved, the complaint would have to come from him or an authorised representative. What is the locus standi of Satinder Singh or any unrelated third party in this matter? (vi) Sections 336(1), 336(2) and 336(3) of BNS These provisions deal with forgery involving false documents or electronic records. How does reposting a pre-existing video amount to creating a false document or forged electronic record? No document was fabricated. No electronic record was forged. Again, even assuming that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the aggrieved person, why has no complaint been filed either by him or by any authorised representative? How does Satinder Singh acquire standing in such circumstances? (vii) Section 340 of BNS concerns fraudulent or dishonest use of a forged document or electronic record. When there is no forged document at all, the provision itself cannot apply. Further, the alleged victim has neither filed nor authorised any complaint. In such circumstances, invocation of Section 340 appears entirely untenable. (viii) Section 353 of BNS concerns statements or reports intended to incite mutiny, offences against the State, public disorder, or inter-community violence. How can reposting a video of a man receiving a facial massage — even if someone attributes resemblance to Prime Minister Narendra Modi — possibly amount to incitement of mutiny, public disorder, or offences against the State? The invocation of this section is wholly unsustainable. (ix) Section 356 of BNS concerns defamation. However, Section 222 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 clearly provides that defamation can be prosecuted only by the aggrieved person. If the aggrieved person is a public servant, proceedings can be initiated only by a Public Prosecutor with prior sanction of the Central or State Government as the case may be. Neither Satinder Singh nor any unrelated individual has the legal standing to initiate such proceedings. 3. Dr. Hooda Ji, permit me to share a version of a well-known satirical anecdote about policing, which bears a striking resemblance to the present case, where Professor Madhu Kishwar is being compelled to endure the ordeal of criminal prosecution despite the absence of the essential ingredients of the offences invoked against her. A man sees an old friend running down the street — terrified, panting, and sweating. He stops him and asks, “What is wrong? Why are you running?” The friend replies, “The police are arresting all bulls!” The man says, “But you are not a bull. Why are you running?” The friend shouts back, “We both know I am not a bull. But by the time I prove it to the police and the courts, I will have spent the rest of my life in jail!” Terrified by hearing this, the other man also starts running. 4. Dr. Hooda Ji, I have heard that you are a competent, upright and distinguished officer. It is the solemn responsibility of senior officers of the IPS to prevent abuse of the criminal justice process and to ensure that policing does not degenerate into a spectacle in which criminal law is stretched beyond recognition to harass individuals for expressing views that may inconvenience those in power. 5. I therefore request your kind intervention to prevent the continued harassment and persecution of Professor Madhu Kishwar for her views on public issues, and to direct immediate closure of the case. 6. This letter has also been converted into video format and attached.👇 With Regards

Dear Dr. Sagar Preet Hooda, IPS Director General of Police, Chandigarh DGP Chandigarh Police Subject: Request for intervention regarding FIR No. 44 dated 19-04-2026 registered by East Sector 26 Police Station, Chandigarh 1. I write this letter through X with the sincere hope that it reaches your attention. The present issue concerns FIR No. 44 dated 19-04-2026 registered by East Sector 26 Police Station, Chandigarh against Professor Madhu Kishwar Madhu Purnima Kishwar and a few others under Sections 66C, 66D and 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000, and Sections 196, 318, 336(1), 336(3), 336(4), 340, 353 and 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The FIR was registered on the complaint of one Satinder Singh, who alleged that a video clip was being circulated by various social media users with misleading claims that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was receiving a facial massage from a woman. According to the complaint, several social media accounts amplified this allegedly false narrative. As understood, the complainant further stated that his preliminary verification revealed that the video was originally posted by one Pardeep Kaur Dhillon through Facebook, YouTube and Instagram accounts on 12 April 2026, and that the person in the video was actually Jaspal Singh Sarai, who was apparently receiving a facial massage from a woman. However, even a plain reading of the complaint does not disclose the commission of any offence, much less a cognizable offence. Surprisingly, the police registered the FIR invoking an extraordinary range of provisions relating to identity theft, cheating, forgery, promoting enmity, defamation, public mischief, and even obscenity. 2. Let us briefly examine the applicability of each provision invoked in the FIR: (i) Section 66C of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalises fraudulent or dishonest use of another person’s electronic signature, password, or unique identification feature. The fundamental question is: whose identity has Professor Madhu Kishwar allegedly stolen? Was it the identity of Satinder Singh? If not, what is his locus standi in lodging such a complaint? If the allegation concerns some other person, has that person complained? In the absence of any such complaint, how is an offence under this section made out? (ii) Section 66D of the Information Technology Act, 2000 relates to cheating by personation through a communication device or computer resource. Whom did Professor Madhu Kishwar allegedly impersonate? Who was deceived, and what wrongful gain or loss occurred? Did she impersonate Satinder Singh or any other person? If not, how does the complainant acquire locus standi under this provision? (iii) Section 67 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 criminalises publication or transmission of obscene material in electronic form. The complainant himself states that the video was originally posted by Pardeep Kaur Dhillon and depicted Jaspal Singh Sarai receiving a facial massage from a woman. The video, by any objective standard, contains no obscene or lascivious material. Neither individuals were nude, nor was any sexual act depicted. It was merely a professional facial massage. Professor Madhu Kishwar merely reposted the content on X. Therefore, the essential ingredients of Section 67 are entirely absent. (iv) Section 196 of BNS concerns promoting enmity between groups on grounds such as religion, race, language, place of birth, or residence, and acts prejudicial to communal harmony. How does reposting a video of a man receiving a facial massage — even assuming someone believed the man resembled Prime Minister Narendra Modi — amount to promoting enmity between groups or disturbing public harmony? The provision appears wholly inapplicable. (v) Section 318 of BNS deals with the offence of cheating. The essential ingredients of cheating require deception causing wrongful loss, delivery of property, or inducement to act or omit in a manner causing harm. How does reposting a social media video satisfy any of these ingredients? Even assuming, for the sake of argument, that Prime Minister Narendra Modi felt personally aggrieved, the complaint would have to come from him or an authorised representative. What is the locus standi of Satinder Singh or any unrelated third party in this matter? (vi) Sections 336(1), 336(2) and 336(3) of BNS These provisions deal with forgery involving false documents or electronic records. How does reposting a pre-existing video amount to creating a false document or forged electronic record? No document was fabricated. No electronic record was forged. Again, even assuming that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was the aggrieved person, why has no complaint been filed either by him or by any authorised representative? How does Satinder Singh acquire standing in such circumstances? (vii) Section 340 of BNS concerns fraudulent or dishonest use of a forged document or electronic record. When there is no forged document at all, the provision itself cannot apply. Further, the alleged victim has neither filed nor authorised any complaint. In such circumstances, invocation of Section 340 appears entirely untenable. (viii) Section 353 of BNS concerns statements or reports intended to incite mutiny, offences against the State, public disorder, or inter-community violence. How can reposting a video of a man receiving a facial massage — even if someone attributes resemblance to Prime Minister Narendra Modi — possibly amount to incitement of mutiny, public disorder, or offences against the State? The invocation of this section is wholly unsustainable. (ix) Section 356 of BNS concerns defamation. However, Section 222 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 clearly provides that defamation can be prosecuted only by the aggrieved person. If the aggrieved person is a public servant, proceedings can be initiated only by a Public Prosecutor with prior sanction of the Central or State Government as the case may be. Neither Satinder Singh nor any unrelated individual has the legal standing to initiate such proceedings. 3. Dr. Hooda Ji, permit me to share a version of a well-known satirical anecdote about policing, which bears a striking resemblance to the present case, where Professor Madhu Kishwar is being compelled to endure the ordeal of criminal prosecution despite the absence of the essential ingredients of the offences invoked against her. A man sees an old friend running down the street — terrified, panting, and sweating. He stops him and asks, “What is wrong? Why are you running?” The friend replies, “The police are arresting all bulls!” The man says, “But you are not a bull. Why are you running?” The friend shouts back, “We both know I am not a bull. But by the time I prove it to the police and the courts, I will have spent the rest of my life in jail!” Terrified by hearing this, the other man also starts running. 4. Dr. Hooda Ji, I have heard that you are a competent, upright and distinguished officer. It is the solemn responsibility of senior officers of the IPS to prevent abuse of the criminal justice process and to ensure that policing does not degenerate into a spectacle in which criminal law is stretched beyond recognition to harass individuals for expressing views that may inconvenience those in power. 5. I therefore request your kind intervention to prevent the continued harassment and persecution of Professor Madhu Kishwar for her views on public issues, and to direct immediate closure of the case. 6. This letter has also been converted into video format and attached.👇 With Regards

M. Nageswara Rao IPS (Retired)

17,299 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce