A fresh legal battle involving social media platforms has emerged after Hyderabad Cyber Crime Police registered a criminal case against Meta India’s head and the operators of several Facebook and Instagram accounts over allegedly objectionable and digitally manipulated content targeting Prime Minister Narendra Modi during the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP)-led protests over the NEET-UG paper leak issue.
The case comes at a time when the role of social media companies in moderating political content is once again under intense scrutiny. Investigators are examining whether morphed images, AI-generated visuals and allegedly offensive posts circulated during the nationwide student protests violated provisions of India’s cyber and criminal laws while also raising concerns about misinformation, public order and online accountability.
According to the First Information Report (FIR), the complaint was filed on July 29 by T. Saikiran Goud, a 32-year-old BJP Telangana Social Media CC member. Goud alleged that while browsing social media platforms, he came across multiple Facebook and Instagram reels and posts that portrayed Prime Minister Narendra Modi in a derogatory manner.
In his complaint, Goud claimed that the posts appeared to be digitally manipulated and carried narratives that could be prejudicial to national integrity. He further alleged that the content had the potential to spread misinformation, incite hatred, promote hostility among different sections of society and encourage offensive public discourse.
The complainant submitted at least 20 social media URLs to the Hyderabad Cyber Crime Police and requested a detailed investigation into the origin of the content. He urged authorities to preserve digital evidence, identify the individuals operating the accounts and seek necessary details from Meta to establish responsibility for the posts.
Besides seeking action against the individual account operators, the complaint also requested legal proceedings against Meta for allegedly allowing such content to remain accessible on its platforms. Based on the allegations, Hyderabad Cyber Crime Police registered a case under Sections 66(C) and 67 of the Information Technology Act along with Sections 353(2) and 336(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). The investigation has been assigned to Inspector P. Jayashankar.
The legal action widened after another complaint was reportedly filed by Hyderabad-based businessman S. Aravind Reddy. According to reports, the second complaint also referred to objectionable comments accompanying the posts. It alleged that users had employed offensive language, ridicule and indecent remarks directed at the Prime Minister and other individuals appearing in the manipulated content.
The complaint further stated that many of the visuals appeared to have been digitally altered or generated using artificial intelligence before being circulated across social media platforms. Investigators are expected to examine whether AI tools were used in creating the disputed material and whether such content violated existing cyber laws governing digital manipulation and online misinformation.
The complainants argued that the widespread circulation of such posts could mislead the public, encourage misinformation campaigns and disturb public order. They also maintained that the content had the potential to defame public figures, outrage public decency and amplify hostility through coordinated online engagement.
The development follows heightened tensions surrounding online content linked to the CJP-led agitation over alleged irregularities in India’s examination system. The protest movement gained nationwide attention after students and young activists demanded accountability over the NEET-UG paper leak controversy and broader concerns regarding examination transparency.
For nearly two months, demonstrators camped at Delhi’s Jantar Mantar, demanding the resignation of former Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan and structural reforms aimed at preventing future examination leaks. Protesters argued that recurring paper leak incidents had eroded public confidence in competitive examinations and affected the futures of millions of students across the country.
The demonstrations intensified during the Monsoon Session of Parliament when protesters attempted to march towards Parliament on July 20. Delhi Police dispersed the gathering using tear gas and lathi-charge after the march was stopped, an incident that triggered widespread discussions on social media and significantly increased online engagement related to the protest movement.
As the protests gained momentum, several viral videos, memes and edited images featuring political leaders circulated widely across Facebook, Instagram and other platforms. Some of those posts are now under investigation after complaints alleged they crossed the line from political criticism into unlawful and objectionable content.
Meanwhile, Meta has also come under pressure from the Central Government following a separate controversy involving Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s official Facebook account. Earlier this week, one of the Prime Minister’s videos was reportedly blocked briefly on Facebook, prompting questions over the platform’s moderation systems.
Following that episode, Meta reportedly wrote to the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), assuring the government that it had strengthened internal safeguards for posts shared by the Prime Minister and other high-profile public figures. According to reports, the company informed the ministry that such content would now undergo multiple layers of review involving senior officials before any moderation-related action is taken.
The assurance reflects growing regulatory attention on how global technology companies handle politically sensitive content in India. Authorities have increasingly emphasized that digital platforms must balance freedom of expression with responsibilities relating to misinformation, public safety and compliance with Indian law.
The Hyderabad investigation is expected to examine not only the origin of the disputed posts but also the extent of Meta’s response after the content was reported. Officials may seek technical records, account details and other digital evidence as part of the inquiry.
Legal experts note that the outcome of the investigation could influence future discussions on platform accountability, AI-generated political content and the responsibilities of intermediaries under India’s evolving digital regulatory framework. At the same time, the case is likely to revive debates over the boundary between political satire, criticism and unlawful online content.
As the investigation progresses, authorities are expected to determine whether criminal liability extends solely to the creators of the disputed material or whether any responsibility can also be attributed to platform management under applicable legal provisions. Until then, the case is set to remain closely watched by policymakers, technology companies, political parties and digital rights observers alike, given its wider implications for online speech, content moderation and cyber governance in India.