SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Mad) 4765

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, K. RAJASEKAR, JJ.
Play Games 24x7 Private Limited, A Company Incorporated Under The Companies Act 1956, Represented By Its Authorized Representative Mr. Sameer Chugh and Anr. – Petitioners
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu, Through Chief Secretary, Secretariat and Ors. – Respondents
W.P. Nos.6784, 6794, 6799, 6970, 8832 and 13158 of 2025
Decided On : 03-06-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioners:Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, Senior Advocate for Mr. Akhil Anand, Mr. R. Bharadwajaramasubramaniam, Mr. R.S. Diwaagar.
For the Respondents:Mr. P.S. Raman, Advocate General asst by Mr. T. Chandrasekaran, Special Government Pleader and Mr. E. Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor, Mr. Amit Anand Tiwari, Additional Advocate General asst by Mr. B. Arvind Srevatsa, Mr. AR. L. Sundaresan, Additional Solicitor General of India asst by Mr. R. Rajesh Vivekananthan, Deputy Solicitor General of India.

The court upheld the state's legislative competence to regulate online games of skill, balancing individual rights against public health needs, confirming that such regulations are constitutional.

Headnote:(A) Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Games Act, 2022 - Sections 5 and 14 - Challenge to constitutionality - Act amended the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, to prohibit online games played for stakes - Petitioners contended that new regulations were beyond State's competence and violated constitutional rights, seeking to declare them unconstitutional. The Court previously upheld the Act's validity but struck down parts of its Schedule declaring games of skill as games of chance. This Court ruled that the provisions regarding regulation of online games are within the legislative competence of the State under Entries 6 and 26 of List II. Regulations for gaming can be enacted to address public health concerns arising from online gaming. Challenges based on legislative competency and fundamental rights were found unsubstantiated. The principle of balancing individual rights against public health interests was reaffirmed, leading to the dismissal of the petitions. (Paras 9-13, 15-18, 25-64)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners are gaming companies arguing the State's regulation of online games violates their rights and the Constitution. The amended Act stems from previous legislation struck down by the Court regarding online gaming. The State aims to regulate public health and safety pertaining to gambling. (Paras 1-4, 9)

Findings of Court:
The Court affirmed the State's regulatory authority over online games of skill. The provisions were enacted to safeguard public health, finding no unconstitutional infringement on individual rights. (Paras 36-64)

Issues: The main legal questions pertained to the legislative competency of the State in regulating online gaming, the validity of the restrictions on real money games, and the balance of individual rights with public health requirements. (Paras 17-19, 25-63)

Ratio Decidendi: The legislative competence of the State to regulate online gaming activities is valid and justified, aligning with public health concerns. The enactment is not ultra vires nor does it violate constitutional rights when balancing collective welfare against individual freedoms. (Paras 36-64)

Result: Writ Petitions dismissed.

Table of Content
1. petitioners challenge constitutionality of online gaming regulation. (Para 1 , 2)
2. court's final dismissal of writ petitions. (Para 3 , 65)
3. state's legislative history in regulating online games of skill. (Para 4 , 5 , 6)
4. state legislature's competence vs. central laws on online gambling. (Para 15 , 17 , 18 , 20)
5. discussion on the legality of regulation hours for online gaming. (Para 37 , 38 , 41)
6. public health risks necessitate state regulation of online gaming. (Para 46 , 47 , 64)

ORDER :

(S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.)

1. The Writ Petitioners before us are online gaming companies, player associations and individual player. These Writ petitions have been filed with a prayer seeking a Writ of Declaration to declare Section 5 read with Section 14 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gaming and Regulation of Online Games Act, 2022 along with the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025 (‘RMG Regulations’) as unconstitutional in so far as its application to online games of skill played with money or other stakes.

PRELUDE:

2. The State of Tamil Nadu, in order to curb the ill effects of online gaming addiction amended the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 by enacting The Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021. The amended statute prohibited all forms of games being conducted in cyberspace, irrespective of the game being a game of mere skill, if such game is played for a wager, bet, money or other stake.

3. The validity of the Act was challenged before this Hon'ble Court in Junglee Games India Private Limited vs. The State Of Tamil Nadu, 2021, 2021 SCC OnLine Mad. 2767 The Hon'ble Madras High Court struck down Part II of the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021, which banned wagering or betting in cyberspace, as ultra vires to the Constitution. However, the following observation was made by the Division Bench ;

"130. Accordingly, the impugned Part Il of the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021 (Act 1 of 2021), which amends the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, is declared to be ultra vires the Constitution in its entirety and struck down as a consequence. Nothing herein will prevent an appropriate legislation conforming to the constitutional sense of propriety being brought in the field of betting and gambling by the State"

4. Subsequently, the State Government enacted the TAMIL NADU PROHIBITION OF ONLINE GAMBLING AND REGULATION OF ONLINE GAMES ACT , 2022 (hereinafter referred to as “The Act, 2022”) on the recommendation of a Five Member Committee under the Chairmanship of retired Judge of this Hon'ble Court based on inputs received from seventeen stakeholders comprising of representatives from the online gaming industry, think tanks, political parties, players association and social activists on differentiation of real money games and other forms of games, to provide age and money restrictions, to ban advertisements, to prevent money laundering and to provide grievance redressal mechanism.

5. The Act, 2022 was challenged by various Gaming platforms including the petitioners herein in All India Gaming Federation vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Others, (2023) SCC OnLine Mad 6973 wherein this Hon'ble High Court upheld the validity of the Act while it struck down the Schedule which included Rummy and poker as games of chance. In the All India Gaming Federation Judgment (hereinafter referred to as “AIGF 2023 Judgment”), the Hon’ble Division Bench has upheld the validity of the Act, but has struck down the Schedule alone. As against this portion of the Order of the Hon'ble Division Bench, the State has filed SLP and the same is pending before the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

6. Section 3 of the Act, 2022 provides for establishment of an Expert Body known as the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority. The Authority in exercise of the power conferred to it under Section 5 of the Act, notified the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Re

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top