Karnataka HC seeks Centre’s response on Online Gaming Legislation by Sept 8

The Karnataka High Court on Saturday heard a writ petition filed by Head Digital Works, the mum or dad firm of the real-money gaming platform A23, difficult the newly enacted Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025. The Bench, led by Justice B.M. Shyam Prasad, directed the Union authorities to file its response by September 8.

Senior Advocate C. Aryama Sundaram, showing for Head Digital Works, argued that the legislation handed by the Centre violates a number of constitutional rights, together with the elemental proper to hold on commerce and enterprise. He warned that the laws threatens lakhs of jobs linked to India’s burgeoning on-line gaming sector. Sundaram urged the courtroom to make sure that the Act just isn’t notified till the matter is totally heard. He additionally requested that the federal government present not less than one week’s prior intimation earlier than notifying the legislation, in order that affected stakeholders might search applicable authorized treatments.

On behalf of the Centre, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta and Additional Solicitor General N. Venkataraman defended the federal government’s place. They maintained that after Presidential assent is obtained, the legislation should be notified, leaving little room for delay. Mehta additionally underlined that the case raises a broader query concerning jurisdiction—whether or not the Centre or particular person states maintain regulatory authority over the real-money on-line gaming business.

Head Digital Works in its 396-page petition, a replica of which is with Storyboard18, Head Digital Works has challenged the constitutionality of the Online Gaming Act, arguing that it infringes upon a number of elementary rights assured below the Constitution.

Key constitutional violations cited:

Article 19(1)(g): Right to observe commerce or enterprise.
The petition underscores that the Supreme Court and numerous High Courts have persistently acknowledged video games of talent—even when performed for stakes—as a professional enterprise, distinct from playing.

Article 14: Equality earlier than legislation.
The firm contends that the Act is “manifestly arbitrary” as a result of it equates law-abiding home operators with unlawful offshore betting platforms.

Articles 19(1)(a) and 21: Freedom of expression and proper to livelihood.
According to the petition, these rights are immediately curtailed by the sudden prohibition.

The submitting additionally refers to previous rulings of the Madras, Kerala, and Karnataka High Courts, which had struck down related blanket bans imposed by state governments on on-line talent gaming. Appeals in these circumstances are at the moment pending earlier than the Supreme Court.

Head Digital Works, which runs A23, acknowledged that it employs 606 individuals immediately and contributes considerably to authorities revenues. Since inception, the corporate claims to have paid over ₹1,643 crore in GST and practically ₹96 crore in service tax (pre-GST). In FY 2024–25 alone, it deposited ₹687 crore in GST.

Broadly, the petition notes, the net gaming business contributes ₹6,500–₹6,800 crore in direct taxes and practically ₹75,000 crore in oblique taxes yearly, whereas supporting over two lakh jobs.

The firm expressed concern that the Act was enacted with none public session or stakeholder dialogue, regardless of years of structured discussions between the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) and the business. It highlighted that earlier amendments to the IT Rules, 2021, had already launched a framework for self-regulatory our bodies in on-line gaming—provisions that have been by no means applied.

“It is astonishing that after promoting the sector through initiatives like the Shillong Centre of Excellence in Online Gaming and the Bharat Tech Triumph Program, the Union Government has overnight criminalized the very industry it once supported,” the petition states.

To counter considerations round participant security, the petition emphasizes that operators like A23 comply with accountable gaming protocols, together with obligatory KYC verification, strict 18+ age restrictions, deposit limits, self-exclusion instruments, and licensed RNG (Random Number Generator) expertise to make sure honest play. Independent audits and certifications from iTech Labs and Gaming Laboratories International have additional validated the integrity of its platforms.