More Stories

Informist, Wednesday, May 27, 2026

 

--SC: Betting, wagering not entitled to protection, even if games of skill 

--CONTEXT: SC order on states' ban on online games played for bet, wager 

--SC OKs Karnataka, Tamil Nadu ban on online games, including games of skill 

 

NEW DELHI - The Supreme Court on Wednesday held that states can ban online games, including games of skill, if they pose a threat to the states and the well-being of the masses. If games of substantial skill are conducted in a manner that they start to pose problems for the state, or cause harm to the public, then states will not be powerless to regulate such games, the apex court said.

 

The bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan upheld the ban implemented by the Tamil Nadu and Karnataka governments on online games, irrespective of whether the game is a game of mere skill, if it is played for a bet, money, or any other stake. Commercial games of skill would be protected by the constitutional guarantee laid down in the Indian Constitution, the bench said. However, betting or wagering on any game, be it a game of skill, would not be entitled to receive any such protection unless the legislature creates an exception in favour of such betting on games of skill, the bench said. The state's competence to regulate certain activities also enables it to prohibit the same activities.

 

The apex court said that online money gaming has a definite impact on the public. Online money gaming has been disturbing the tranquillity of the public by making betting and gambling more normalised and accessible, the court said. Therefore, public tranquillity is breached, and consequently, the states would have competence to invoke public order and seek to curb the mischief and restore public tranquillity, it said.

 

The addiction and depression that stem from indulging in online gaming and the frequency of suicides that are reported would go on to indicate that this poses a widespread public health issue as well, the court said. The Tamil Nadu and Karnataka governments' legislation is supported by empirical data, contrary to the gaming companies' assertion, the court said. 

 

The rummy companies had argued that games of skill are a distinct class and have been judicially distinguished in this country from games of chance. When the basis of the distinction is whether a game depends on chance or it depends on skill, the predominance test ought to be applied, the companies said. The card game of rummy, per se, has been judicially recognised as a game of skill, the companies said.

 

The gaming companies said that the distinction between skill and chance is vital because states do not have legislative competence over games of skill but may regulate games of chance. They said that when one is playing a game of skill, whether it is played physically or virtually, it makes no difference.

 

The state governments said the decision to bring in the legislation was taken after multiple instances of suicides being reported, given the addictive tendency of these games and the financial losses that they result in. The state governments said games like Rummy Circle have 30 million registered players, with about 50,000 new players being added every day. The state governments said recent statistics suggest that the target audience for these games is the young and uneducated, as the games offer "easy incentives by way of real cash as prizes". 

 

The nature of the games which have been prohibited is such that an initial amount is deposited by the player, following which the player keeps betting with more sums of money depending upon the fall of cards, and given the addictive tendency that such games prey on, the player tends to raise his stakes in the hope of a bigger win, the state governments said. The gaming companies cannot assert any right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution because the games offered amount to "gambling/betting activity, despite being a game of skill, since it is being played for a financial or other stake". The governments said that there cannot be any absolute right to practise any profession or to carry on any activity, trade or business and they are subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(6) of the Constitution.  End

 

Reported by Surya Tripathi

Edited by Saji George Titus

 

For users of real-time market data terminals, Informist news is available exclusively on the NSE Cogencis WorkStation.

 

Cogencis news is now Informist news. This follows the acquisition of Cogencis Information Services Ltd. by NSE Data & Analytics Ltd., a 100% subsidiary of the National Stock Exchange of India Ltd. As a part of the transaction, the news department of Cogencis has been sold to Informist Media Pvt. Ltd.

 

Informist Media Tel +91 (11) 4220-1000

Send comments to feedback@informistmedia.com

 

© Informist Media Pvt. Ltd. 2026. All rights reserved.