New Delhi, Sept 8 — The Supreme Court on Monday transferred to itself petitions pending before three high courts that challenge the constitutional validity of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025.
A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan directed the Karnataka, Delhi and Madhya Pradesh high courts to digitally transmit all records within a week. “This is a challenge to the Act before three high courts. If they can be called here, it would save time,” Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Centre, told the bench.
The transfer came on a plea filed by the Union government, which cited the multiplicity of litigation and sought a consolidated hearing. The Centre had moved the top court on September 4, days after the law received Presidential assent on August 22.
Senior counsel C. Aryama Sundaram, representing the petitioner gaming companies, also supported the transfer. “We will be very happy if we get a finality if the court hears it. I had pressed for an interim order, therefore, My Lords please transfer,” he submitted.
The new law — passed by Parliament on August 21 during the Monsoon session — is the first central legislation imposing a nationwide ban on real-money online gaming, including popular formats such as fantasy sports. It prohibits offering or playing such games regardless of whether they are based on skill or chance, and categorises violations as cognisable and non-bailable offences.
The Act has been challenged primarily on the ground that it extends to judicially recognised skill-based games, such as e-sports, and not merely games of chance. Petitioners argue this amounts to a blanket prohibition that violates Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to practise a profession or carry on any occupation, trade or business.
With the transfer, the Supreme Court will now decide whether the law survives constitutional scrutiny. Until then, the industry — valued at billions and employing thousands — faces uncertainty as companies await clarity on whether their operations are legal under the new regime.
