Indian authorities have initiated an investigation against Meta's head in India concerning manipulated videos of Modi.

      Hyderabad's cybercrime police have lodged a report against Meta India head Arun Srinivas concerning AI-altered videos of Prime Minister Narendra Modi, intensifying the existing tensions between the government and the platform. Authorities have opened a criminal case against Meta’s India chief related to the manipulated videos of Modi that circulated on Facebook and Instagram, heightening ongoing discord between the government and the company.

      The first information report, filed on July 31, names Arun Srinivas and follows weeks after New Delhi summoned Meta regarding the content on its apps. The complaint focuses on altered media, with two Instagram users informing the city's cybercrime police that they encountered numerous digitally modified videos and images of Modi, which they labeled as misleading, derogatory, and obscene.

      These videos were politically charged, emerging after a student protest at Delhi's Jantar Mantar organized by a group calling itself the Cockroach Janta Party, amid a wave of unrest impacting the government. The police are exploring serious charges and potential violations under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, India’s new criminal code, and the Information Technology Act.

      The case remains in its early stages, with the report indicating that the investigation is preliminary and no conclusions have been reached yet. However, the act of naming a senior executive in an FIR marks a notable step. In response, Meta has sought to reassure the government, stating it would enhance oversight of prominent accounts, mandating that at least two senior staff members review posts before any action is taken, an effort aimed at defusing tensions.

      The friction did not begin here; the Indian IT ministry recently summoned Meta executives for an explanation “at the highest level” after a Modi post was briefly restricted, an incident the company attributed to an inadvertent block. The regulations were developed with companies like Meta in mind, with India’s content-policing framework targeted at major platforms, leading the government to take a firmer stance on how they manage material concerning the prime minister.

      The recent student protests have raised the stakes, leading to the resignation of an education minister and prompting Modi’s first public remark on the unrest, making any content related to his image politically sensitive. India is a vast and crucial market for Meta, ranking among the company’s largest user bases, which affords New Delhi significant leverage and makes the company cautious about appearing to oppose authorities.

      The potential legal implications are significant but unpredictable. Reports against technology executives in India often serve as pressure tactics and may not necessarily result in charges, yet they carry the risk of summonses, travel restrictions, and extended scrutiny. There is a precedent for this approach; Indian authorities have previously initiated cases and summoned executives from platforms like X over content discrepancies, utilizing individual liability to exert influence over foreign-based companies.

      Deepfakes have emerged as a contentious policy issue, with India grappling for years on how to regulate synthetic media, at times blurring the division between deepfakes and conventional fake news. The regulatory framework is still evolving, with the nation establishing an expanding system to monitor social media and streaming platforms, where manipulated political content finds itself caught between free speech and defamation.

      For Meta, this situation creates a familiar dilemma, as it navigates the tension between users sharing protected, albeit critical, political content and a government that views defamatory content about Modi as a matter of law and order. The company's decision-making is precarious, as excessive removal of content risks accusations of censorship, while insufficient action could lead to cases like the present one, leaving little opportunity to appease both parties simultaneously.

      The outcome will be closely observed. Whether the Hyderabad case progresses or dwindles, it indicates India's readiness to resort to criminal law, particularly against named executives, when seeking to hold platforms accountable for content related to its leader.