The Supreme Court on Monday consolidated all pending legal challenges to the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, transferring petitions from multiple high courts to itself for authoritative adjudication.
A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan allowed the Centre’s transfer petition and ordered:
“The transfer petition is allowed and the proceedings are transferred to this Court… We make it clear that no other High Court will entertain a challenge to the said law and proceedings will stand transferred to this Court.”
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Union government, submitted that at least three high courts — Karnataka, Delhi and Madhya Pradesh — were seized of challenges to the Act. He urged the apex court to centralise proceedings to avoid contradictory rulings on the law, which imposes a blanket ban on real-money online games and related advertisements.
The petitions sought to be transferred were filed by Head Digital Works Pvt Ltd, Bagheera Carrom (OPC) Pvt Ltd, and Clubboom11 Sports & Entertainment Pvt Ltd, pending in the Karnataka, Delhi, and Madhya Pradesh high courts respectively.
According to the Centre’s plea, all three petitions question the Act’s constitutionality, citing alleged violations of Articles 14, 19(1)(g), and 21 of the Constitution. Petitioners also contend that Parliament lacks legislative competence to enact such a law and argue the Act unlawfully ignores the distinction between games of skill and games of chance.
The government emphasised that inconsistent judgments from different courts would create confusion and uncertainty about the law’s enforcement nationwide. It underlined that the Act applies across India, including to services operated from abroad, and therefore its validity must be settled by the Supreme Court alone.
The plea further noted that the definition of “online money games” has been challenged as unconstitutional by multiple stakeholders and that more petitions are likely to follow.
The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, passed in August, introduces a sweeping prohibition on real-money online games. It also prescribes penalties of up to three years’ imprisonment and ₹1 crore in fines for service providers, and up to two years and ₹50 lakh in fines for advertisers and promoters.
While banning real-money games, the Act simultaneously seeks to encourage e-Sports and casual online gaming.
In prior hearings, SG Mehta defended the law as a “constitutional function” of Parliament and the President, cautioning courts against halting its implementation merely because individual companies objected. He stressed that “online money games” were linked to addiction among minors and instances of suicide, citing the need for strong regulatory measures.
Petitioners, however, have argued that the Act severely impacts legitimate businesses. For example, Head Digital Works, which runs the online rummy and poker platform A23, contended that the blanket ban disregards decades of jurisprudence distinguishing skill-based games from gambling. Similarly, Bagheera Carrom told the Delhi High Court that its future operations remain uncertain until the government notifies an authority to classify online games under the Act.
