The Madras High Court affirmed on Thursday that the Tamil Nadu government has the authority to intervene in the regulation of online real money games (RMG) if they are deemed addictive and socially harmful, provided that such regulations respect the fundamental rights of both players and gaming companies.
This statement came during the court’s hearing of petitions by online gaming companies against the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority’s 2025 regulations. These regulations introduce a “blank hour” ban from midnight to 5 a.m. and mandate an Aadhaar-based user verification system.
Justices SM Subramaniam and K Rajasekar of the bench commented on the state’s responsibility to its residents. “The state can take care of people in Tamil Nadu… some activities are more addictive than others and thus, the State has to control those,” they observed. The court’s interim remarks support the state’s stance that RMG poses unique risks compared to other forms of entertainment due to its addictive nature and potential social impact.
Representing the gaming companies, senior counsels Mukul Rohatgi and Sajjan Poovayya argued that online RMG is already under the purview of Union government regulation. They accused the Tamil Nadu government of attempting to indirectly prohibit online gaming under the pretense of protecting residents from addiction.
The issue of online gaming regulation also surfaced in a parliamentary discussion on Wednesday. Union Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw, responding to DMK MP Dayanidhi Maran’s questions, highlighted that betting and gambling, including online gaming, are matters for state jurisdiction, adhering to the Constitution’s federal structure.
Rohatgi, specifically representing Playgames 24X7, criticized the state’s approach, likening it to a “great grandfather” dictating that residents should sleep during the prescribed blank hours. He challenged the selective restriction on RMG, questioning the rationale behind allowing other forms of entertainment to operate through the night.
The High Court noted the distinct risks associated with RMG compared to other games, stating, “No one is going to lose all money or die because they lost in football. But here (in real money games) it can happen.” This underscores the court’s recognition of the higher stakes involved in RMG.
As the hearing continues, Rohatgi has suggested allowing players to select their own five-hour blank period, proposing a more flexible approach to regulation.
