Karnataka High Court
Credit: DH Photo
Bengaluru: The high court on Saturday asked the union government to respond to the petition challenging the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025.
Justice B M Shyam Prasad adjourned the proceedings to September 8, asking the Centre to submit its response on the application filed by the petitioners seeking interim stay on the implementation of the legislation.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Head Digital Works Private Limited, Delhi, which operates the gaming application and website A23.
The petition challenged the new legislation, which received President's assent on August 22.
During the hearing, senior counsel Aryama Sundaram, appearing for the petitioners, said implementation of the new Act would affect lakhs of jobs as well as the industry.
“It is our concern that if this industry is closed overnight, there will be a serious backlash. Let them (Centre) file their reply and let them not notify the Act till matter is heard. Or give a week's notice before notifying the Act so that we can move the court," he said.
Solicitor General (SG) Tushar Mehta, appearing for the union government, said that it is for the first time when the court is examining the competence of parliament. He said the preamble of the new legislation says it (the issue) has extra territorial/trans border implications.
“Once the President has given assent, notifying is a constitutional process and courts may not interfere. Once Parliament passes legislation, assent of the President having been satisfied, merely because some individual is aggrieved, we need not inform him in advance that we will be notifying the law,” the SG said.
When the court asked the union whether there is any possibility of an immediate notification, Tushar Mehta sought time to take instructions.
According to the petitioners, the legislation was enacted without prior consultation with stakeholders.
The petitioners cited the Apex Court's view that games of skill involving monetary risk are legitimate business activities protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.