New Delhi (HELVILUX) – In what has become one of the most cringeworthy episodes in India’s push for homegrown tech, Galgotias University in Greater Noida has been forced into damage control after its stall at the India AI Impact Summit 2026 in New Delhi turned into a national embarrassment. The university’s representative, Professor Neha Singh from the School of Communications, was caught on camera shamelessly presenting a commercially available Chinese robotic dog as an in-house breakthrough.
In the viral ANI and DD News clips, Professor Singh enthusiastically introduced the quadruped robot named “Orion” to the media swarm: “You need to meet Orion. This has been developed by the Centre of Excellence at Galgotias University.” She went on to hype it as part of the university’s massive ₹350 crore investment in AI, describing the robot as versatile “it can take all shapes and sizes… it’s quite naughty also” capable of “small tasks of surveillance, monitoring.” The pitch was delivered with such unbridled confidence that it briefly fooled reporters and viewers into believing this was a proud Indian innovation on display at a government-backed summit.
The reality hit like a cold bucket of water: “Orion” is nothing more than the Unitree Go2, a ready-made product from Chinese manufacturer Unitree Robotics, easily purchasable online in India for ₹2-3 lakh. Netizens wasted no time exposing the farce, turning the incident into a viral roasting session with hashtags like #FakeAI, #GalgotiasScam and memes flooding timelines. Political parties, including the Congress and RJD, piled on, calling it “brazenly shameless” and a global humiliation for India especially since Chinese media has now picked up the story to mock the episode.
MeitY officials, led by Secretary S Krishnan, stepped in decisively: “Misinformation cannot be encouraged.” The university was directed to vacate its stall immediately on February 18. Galgotias issued a groveling apology, shifting the blame squarely onto Professor Singh she was “ill-informed,” “not an AI expert,” “unauthorised to speak to media,” and got carried away “in her enthusiasm of being on camera.” They insisted no official claim of full development was ever made, only that the robot was used for academic purposes.
Yet Professor Singh doubled down shamelessly in follow-up clarifications. She admitted things “may not have been expressed clearly,” took “accountability” for poor communication due to her “energy and enthusiasm,” and insisted she “could have been more eloquent.” In one clip, she even offered a bizarre analogy: comparing the controversy to how “your 6 can be my 9,” implying perspective matters more than facts. The university’s damage control has been frantic, but her unapologetic media-facing demeanor now with her LinkedIn updated to “open to work” before any firing has only amplified the ridicule.
This isn’t Galgotias’ first rodeo with controversy. The institution has weathered past storms, including a 2014 fraud case involving family members and forged documents, plus endless online complaints about inflated placements and deceptive marketing. While UGC-recognized, its reputation often hinges more on hype than substance.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s latest X post from earlier today, where he shared a “wonderful interaction” with tech investor Vinod Khosla on AI and India’s startup ecosystem. Here we have the PM championing India’s AI future, while a university at his government’s summit gets booted for peddling imported Chinese tech as desi genius. But what more can one expect? This is the same Indian PM who, even after years in power, still refuses to publicly produce his own educational qualification degree. If the highest office in the land dodges basic transparency on credentials, why hold universities or their over-enthusiastic professors to any standard? The trickle-down effect of evasion is clear: from top to bottom, it’s easier to spin than substantiate.
The debate isn’t about hardware vs software it’s about presentation.
And just when you thought the embarrassment couldn’t get bigger, IT giant Wipro got dragged into the same mess at the very same summit. In a viral NDTV interview, a Wipro representative showcased an AI-powered robotic dog dubbed “TJ” quickly identified by online sleuths as the identical Unitree Go2 model. Media captions hyped it as Wipro’s “dog robot,” highlighting “advancements in AI-driven robotics and automation,” with Varun Dubey, Head of Innovation, discussing its industry applications. While Wipro sources rushed to clarify they’re a “software company” that never claimed to build hardware (just customizing software for applications), the optics are brutal: another high-profile Indian entity at the national AI event parading the same imported Chinese gadget under a fancy local name. Netizens are now roasting both, questioning if this is the “vibrant AI ecosystem” we’re exporting talent from or just exporting hot air.
The incident also mirrors another recent controversy involving “Sofi,” a saree-clad mannequin fitted with a Bluetooth speaker and connected to the ChatGPT API. Built by a 17-year-old student as a low-budget classroom experiment, the project itself was a simple demonstration of accessible AI tools. The controversy erupted not because of the student’s effort, but because major media outlets such as Press Trust of India (PTI) and Asian News International (ANI) promoted it as a breakthrough “humanoid AI teacher,” blurring the line between basic API integration and robotics innovation. Social media users quickly pointed out the exaggeration, turning the episode into another viral debate about hype versus substance in India’s tech narrative. Critics linked the overenthusiastic coverage to broader government messaging around AI and innovation, often championed publicly by Narendra Modi. Much like the recent robodog controversy, the issue was not experimentation itself, but the inflation of modest demonstrations into symbols of national technological supremacy.
As the summit continues, this robodog debacle serves as a stark reminder. India’s private education and tech sectors thrive on branding, but without accountability, they risk turning ambition into farce. MeitY’s swift action is welcome, but real progress demands more than apologies and blame-shifting it requires transparency, from professors to the Prime Minister himself. Until then, expect more “Orions” barking empty promises.
And just days after Ursula von der Leyen visited India to advance an ambitious EU–India trade push, anxiety reportedly rippled through parts of Europe from policy circles in Luxembourg to other EU member states about a potential wave of “highly skilled” Indian tech talent arriving to compete in cutting-edge sectors. Click here to read. But if the robodog saga is anything to go by, perhaps they can rest easy for now. Before exporting AI excellence to Europe, India’s institutions may first need to master the modest art of distinguishing between importing a gadget and inventing one. Until then, the only thing crossing borders at scale might be PowerPoint presentations confidently delivered, enthusiastically exaggerated, and tragically fact-checked.
