SC demands centre's response on online gaming law; next hearing on Nov 26

New Delhi: The Supreme Court of India has directed the central government to submit a comprehensive response to a batch of petitions challenging the recently enacted Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, which imposes a nationwide ban on real-money online games, including fantasy sports and e-sports played for stakes. 

The bench, comprising Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan, emphasised the need for a thorough reply beyond the government's initial submissions on interim relief, scheduling the next hearing for November 26.

The Act, passed by Parliament on August 21, 2025, and receiving presidential assent the following day, marks the country's first central legislation specifically targeting online gaming. It prohibits "online money games" and restricts associated banking services and advertising, effectively shutting down platforms that involve wagering. 

Petitioners, including major gaming firms like Head Digital Works and individual players such as a lawyer who relies on online chess for income, argue that the law unconstitutionally blankets skill-based games, previously recognised by courts as legitimate, under the ban, violating Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, which protects the right to practice any profession or carry on lawful trade. Senior advocate CA Sundaram, representing petitioners, highlighted during the hearing that the legislation has led to a complete halt in the online gaming industry for over a month.

Justice Pardiwala remarked on the unique circumstances of one petitioner: "India is a strange country. You are a player. You want to play. It's your only source of income and therefore, you want to join the proceedings." 

The court also hinted that regular competitions and tournaments might be exempt from the law's scope, potentially carving out exceptions for non-wagering events.

Adding complexity, the court tagged a separate public interest litigation (PIL) filed by the Centre for Accountability and Systemic Change (CASC) and Shourya Tiwari, which seeks a nationwide ban on online gambling and betting platforms operating under the guise of social games or e-sports. 

The PIL points to around 2,000 such apps, urging immediate government action to protect youth, including blocking orders under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act, restrictions on UPI transactions, and stricter compliance from app stores like Google and Apple. It also calls for harmonising the new Act with state laws, recovering taxes from offshore operators via agencies like the Enforcement Directorate, and safeguarding children's data collected by gaming companies.

The government, represented by advocate VC Bharathi, argued that the PIL's demands are already addressed in the Online Gaming Act, which is yet to fully come into force. However, the court issued a notice to the Union of India, seeking its response, and directed that copies of the Centre's reply be shared with petitioners in advance to allow for rejoinders.

This case consolidates challenges previously filed in high courts of Delhi, Karnataka, and Madhya Pradesh, now transferred to the apex court. The outcome could reshape India's booming online gaming sector, valued at billions, balancing economic interests with concerns over addiction and unregulated betting.