Problem to Online Gaming Act: SC to Hear After Diwali; Petitioners Say Legislation Shuts Down Business

The Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan was listening to the matter when Senior Advocate C.A. Sundaram, showing for the petitioners, urged for an early listening to, stating, “This has national ramifications and my business is shut down.”

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union authorities, knowledgeable the Court {that a} reply had been filed, whereas Sundaram clarified that the response was solely to the interim software and to not the principle matter.

When the Bench famous doable overlaps with the GST-related proceedings, Additional Solicitor General (ASG) N. Venkataraman stated the one frequent situation involved the Union’s legislative powers. Sundaram, nevertheless, emphasised that he was not questioning the Union’s competence however difficult the constitutionality of the Act itself.

The Bench stated the case could also be positioned earlier than the Chief Justice because it had earlier heard the GST-related matter.

The Court directed completion of pleadings in all petitions transferred from numerous High Courts and ordered that the matter be listed after the Diwali break, on November 4.

Previously, on September 26, after a mentioning was made earlier than the Court searching for pressing itemizing of the petitions difficult the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025. CJI BR Gavai had agreed to record the identical. “Our businesses have been shut down, our petition was before the Karnataka High Court which has been transferred here at the instance of the Centre..please list it urgently..”, a counsel showing earlier than the CJI’s bench had submitted.

Notably, petitions had been filed earlier than the High Courts of Madhya Pradesh, Delhi and Karnataka. Just as we speak, Karnataka High Court deferred the listening to writ petitions difficult the newly enacted Online Gaming Act, 2025, noting that the Centre has moved to consolidate comparable challenges earlier than the Supreme Court.

Karnataka High Court had deferred the listening to writ petitions difficult the newly enacted Online Gaming Act, 2025, noting that the Centre had moved to consolidate comparable challenges earlier than the Supreme Court. Head Digital Works, the guardian firm of A23, challenged the validity of the Act within the Karnataka High Court, arguing that it violated elementary constitutional rights, together with the liberty to conduct enterprise beneath Article 19(1)(g), and infringed on the established authorized distinction between video games of talent and video games of likelihood.

Union authorities had advised the Delhi High Court that it’s within the means of notifying the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, and also will represent a regulatory authority with supporting guidelines beneath the brand new legislation. Appearing for the Union, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta advised a bench of Chief Justice DK Upadhyaya and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela that the federal government was not against on-line gaming as such however was solely towards money-based on-line video games. He stated such platforms typically result in habit and in some instances even suicides amongst kids.

The petition earlier than the High Court was filed by Bagheera Carrom (OPC) Pvt. Ltd., which has developed a web based carrom platform. The firm has challenged the Act as unconstitutional, arbitrary and extremely vires. It argued by means of counsel Udayan Jain that the laws was handed with none stakeholder session and infringes elementary rights beneath Articles 14, 19 and 21 of the Constitution. It was additionally argued that the legislation violates federal ideas, due course of, and the doctrine of separation of powers.

The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025 was launched within the Lok Sabha on August 20, cleared by each Houses of Parliament inside two days by means of a voice vote, and obtained Presidential assent on August 22. Several previous Supreme Court judgments had recognised video games like rummy, poker and carrom as predominantly skill-based and subsequently outdoors the scope of state playing prohibitions. The petitioner has relied on this jurisprudence to argue that Parliament lacks competence to ban such video games outright. The firm has additionally stated that the blanket ban is disproportionate and fails to think about much less intrusive alternate options reminiscent of regulation and age restrictions.

The laws, hailed as a ahead wanting digital coverage measure, seeks to steadiness innovation in India’s gaming sector with sturdy client safety, by encouraging e-sports and social gaming whereas imposing a whole prohibition on exploitative on-line cash video games. The laws is constructed on two clear goals: to advertise and regulate the respectable and useful facets of on-line gaming, and to guard people, particularly youth and susceptible teams, from the dangerous penalties of on-line cash gaming. Moving the Bill, Electronics and IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw had referred to as on-line cash gaming a “public health menace”, mentioning that round 45 crore customers collectively lose practically Rs. 20,000 crore yearly on such platforms. The legislation is split into six chapters, every addressing a unique side of regulation, prohibition, and enforcement.