The Supreme Court will now decide on the validity of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 as it today allowed the Centre’s petition to transfer cases pending before the High Courts challenging the law.
The transfer petition was granted and the proceedings were transferred to this court by a bench composed of Justices KV Viswanathan and JB Pardiwala. We make it clear that no other high court will consider a challenge to the aforementioned law, and this court will continue with the proceedings.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta appearing before the Supreme Court on behalf of the Union government. Last week, Centre’s plea was mentioned before a CJI BR Gavai led bench which agreed to hear the same.
Petitions have been filed before the High Courts of Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Karnataka. Just today, Karnataka High Court deferred the hearing writ petitions challenging the newly enacted Online Gaming Act, 2025, noting that the Centre has moved to consolidate similar challenges before the Supreme Court.
Head Digital Works, the parent company of A23, challenged the validity of the Act in the Karnataka High Court, arguing that it violated fundamental constitutional rights, including the freedom to conduct business under Article 19(1)(g), and infringed on the established legal distinction between games of skill and games of chance Recently, the Union government told the Delhi High Court that it is in the process of notifying the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, and will also constitute a regulatory authority with supporting rules under the new law.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta testified on behalf of the Union before a bench composed of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, stating that the government was not opposed to online gaming as such, but rather only to online games that were based on money.
He stated that these platforms frequently result in addiction and, in some instances, even child suicide. The petition before the High Court was filed by Bagheera Carrom (OPC) Pvt. Ltd., which has developed an online carrom platform.
The company has challenged the Act as unconstitutional, arbitrary and ultra vires. Through counsel Udayan Jain, it argued that Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution violate fundamental rights because the legislation was passed without stakeholder consultation. It was also argued that the law violates federal principles, due process, and the doctrine of separation of powers.
The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 20, cleared by both Houses of Parliament within two days through a voice vote, and received Presidential assent on August 22. Rummy, poker, and carrom, among other games, were deemed to be primarily skill-based in a number of previous rulings by the Supreme Court, and as a result, they were exempt from state gambling laws.
The petitioner has relied on this jurisprudence to argue that Parliament lacks competence to ban such games outright. The company has also stated that the all-encompassing ban is disproportionate and does not take into account alternatives that are less intrusive, such as age restrictions and regulations.
The legislation, hailed as a forward-thinking digital policy measure, encourages e-sports and social gaming while outlawing all exploitative online money games to strike a balance between innovation and strong consumer protection. The legislation is built on two clear objectives: to promote and regulate the legitimate and beneficial aspects of online gaming, and to protect individuals, especially youth and vulnerable groups, from the harmful consequences of online money gaming.
Moving the Bill, Electronics and IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw had called online money gaming a “public health menace”, pointing out that around 45 crore users collectively lose nearly Rs. 20,000 crore annually on such platforms. The law is divided into six chapters, each addressing a different aspect of regulation, prohibition, and enforcement.