Supreme Court of India to hear pleas on nationwide online gaming ban on November 26

The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday directed the Union government to file a detailed response to a series of petitions challenging the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, a new central law that outlaws real-money gaming across the country.

The court said the government’s reply must address all substantive issues raised by the petitioners, who argue that the law has forced India’s multi-billion-rupee online gaming industry into paralysis.

A bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K.V. Viswanathan issued the directive after being informed that the Centre had only filed a preliminary response on interim pleas.

“We want the Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union to file a comprehensive reply to the main petition itself,” the bench said. The government was instructed to share its response with all petitioners in advance, allowing them to submit rejoinders before the next hearing, scheduled for November 26.

The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act (PROGA), passed by Parliament in August and signed into law by the President shortly after, is India’s first central legislation explicitly banning online money games, including fantasy sports and e-sports played for stakes. The law classifies violations as cognisable and non-bailable, effectively making online betting and gaming for monetary rewards a criminal offence.

Appearing for Head Digital Works, the parent company of the A23 gaming platform, Senior Advocate C.A. Sundaram told the court that several businesses had been shut for more than a month, despite the Act not yet being formally notified.

“Our businesses have been shut for more than one month now, and the law has not been notified. We request the court to hear the matter and give relief,” he said.

The petitioners argue that PROGA imposes a blanket ban on all online games played for stakes, even those that courts have previously recognised as skill-based. They contend this violates Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India, which guarantees the right to practice any profession or carry on lawful trade. Many companies have warned of job losses and investor flight as a result of the sweeping restrictions.

During the hearing, a lawyer representing an individual petitioner told the court that he was a professional chess player whose livelihood depended on online tournaments. “India is a strange country. You are a player. You want to play. It’s your only source of income and therefore, you want to join the proceedings,” Justice Pardiwala remarked, while allowing his petition to be tagged with the existing cases.

The bench also took up a separate public interest litigation filed by a non-governmental organisation seeking a nationwide ban on online gambling and betting platforms that allegedly operate under the guise of social or e-sports games.

The court noted that the plea claimed more than 2,000 such apps were active in India and asked the government to respond, tagging the petition with the broader challenge to PROGA.

The Union government, represented by Advocate V.C. Bharathi, told the court that most of the issues raised in the new petition were already addressed by the Act, which awaits notification.