<p>India has the world’s second-largest internet population. Alongside this surge in users, the country has witnessed rapid growth in e-sports, social gaming, and real-money platforms, including rummy and poker. The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (PROGA), which received President Droupadi Murmu’s assent in August, promotes e-sports and social gaming but bans online real money games, departing from judicial precedents on the skill-chance distinction. It aims to encourage e-sports and social gaming segments, while banning all forms of ORMGs and their promotions. PROGA deviates from the landmark precedents of the Supreme Court and the high courts, which differentiated between games of skill and games of chance.</p>.<p>In the past, state legislatures had made numerous attempts to blur the distinction between skill and chance. The courts have struck them down and reaffirmed the distinction. Popular games like rummy and poker have also been subjects of dispute. The Supreme Court in State of Bombay v R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957), State of Andhra Pradesh v. K Satyanarayan and Others (1968), and Dr K.R. Lakshmanan v State of Tamil Nadu (1996), has upheld the distinction. The apex court, while applying the “predominance of skill” test (Chamarbaugwala), held that games where skill outweighs chance cannot be treated as gambling. Further, it clarified that the dominant element of the game determines the nature of the game.</p>.<p>In Lakshmanan, the Supreme Court explained that success in a game of skill requires superior knowledge, training, attention, experience, and adroitness on the part of the player. For example, in Satyanarayan, rummy was upheld as a skill-based game, while in Lakshmanan, horse racing was similarly recognised for requiring expertise. Both were found to satisfy the test of preponderance, requiring knowledge, training, experience, attention, and adroitness. By affirming that these activities rely predominantly on skill rather than chance, the courts decisively reinforced the principle that such pursuits are not chance, but legitimate games of skill.</p>.Online Gaming Act to be implemented from October 1: IT Minister Vaishnaw.<p>The Madras High Court, in All India Gaming Federation v. State of Tamil Nadu (2023), clarified that both online rummy and online poker qualify as games of skill and therefore, fall within the right to trade and business under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 301. The Karnataka High Court, in All India Gaming Federation v. State of Karnataka (2021), held as unconstitutional the ban on all forms of online gaming involving risk of money, irrespective of whether they were games of skill or chance, via the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act 2021. The court reasoned that the amendment to the Act was held to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, as it was unjustifiably selective and imposed an absolute embargo on all games of skill, thereby defying the principle of proportionality.</p>.<p>Furthermore, this categorisation of skill and chance has not been limited to legal discourse; it has also received attention from mathematical and statistical perspectives. A range of mathematical and statistical studies has reinforced the distinction between games of skill and games of chance by adopting a divergent approach. A 2023 study by the Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, found that success in rummy is significantly influenced by skill. Likewise, researchers at the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, concluded that online card games demand a predominance of skill for consistent success. In 2007, Noga Alon, a mathematician, demonstrated that poker is primarily skill-based, with outcomes shaped by a player’s ability to calculate odds and probabilities rather than mere luck.</p>.<p><strong>A doctrinal shift</strong></p>.<p>Together, judicial precedents and studies reaffirm that games where skill predominates, such as rummy, poker, horse racing, and fantasy sports, cannot be equated with gambling but are legitimate, constitutionally safeguarded activities rooted in expertise and strategy.</p>.<p>In the current context, PROGA, in its definition of an online money game, does not distinguish between skill and chance. The question that arises is whether the prior jurisprudence of ‘games of skill’ and ‘games of chance,’ along with the established tests, will now fall under the blanket umbrella of ORMGs. Under such a definition, variants of games like poker and rummy would be classified as ORMGs, which defies the very distinction that has existed since 1957, as established by the legal precedents. Sections 5, 6, and 7 of PROGA show a deviation from the precedents that differentiate between skill and chance. They unilaterally ban all games where real money is used, regardless of the level of skill required to play and win real money. This Act would essentially remove the intelligible differentia that the courts have established time and again.</p>.<p>If so, PROGA represents not just a legislative intervention but a doctrinal shift, raising important questions about the balance between regulatory objectives, constitutional guarantees under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301, and the continuing relevance of judicially evolved distinctions in the Indian gaming ecosystem.</p>.<p>ORMG platforms have challenged the PROGA before the Karnataka High Court, Delhi High Court, and the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The petitioners contend that the Act is ultra vires, vague, and disproportionate, and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. They further argue that the blanket ban disregards established judicial precedents, which have recognised skill-based gaming as a legitimate business activity.</p>.<p>The Supreme Court agreed to consolidate all similar challenges for a joint hearing starting September 8. Its decision on the petitions will be crucial, either reaffirming the distinction between skill and chance or endorsing a new doctrine. Is this the sunset of the sunrise sector? Meanwhile, on September 18, IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw announced that the PROGA, which bans India’s $23-billion online money gaming industry, will come into effect on October 1, while the rules for the DPDP Act, 2023, will be notified by September 28.</p>.<p><em>(Sudhanshu is an associate professor and Harsha is an assistant professor at NLSIU; Aditi is a research associate at the university. The team is working on a funded research project involving online gaming laws)</em></p><p>(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH)</p>
<p>India has the world’s second-largest internet population. Alongside this surge in users, the country has witnessed rapid growth in e-sports, social gaming, and real-money platforms, including rummy and poker. The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (PROGA), which received President Droupadi Murmu’s assent in August, promotes e-sports and social gaming but bans online real money games, departing from judicial precedents on the skill-chance distinction. It aims to encourage e-sports and social gaming segments, while banning all forms of ORMGs and their promotions. PROGA deviates from the landmark precedents of the Supreme Court and the high courts, which differentiated between games of skill and games of chance.</p>.<p>In the past, state legislatures had made numerous attempts to blur the distinction between skill and chance. The courts have struck them down and reaffirmed the distinction. Popular games like rummy and poker have also been subjects of dispute. The Supreme Court in State of Bombay v R.M.D. Chamarbaugwala (1957), State of Andhra Pradesh v. K Satyanarayan and Others (1968), and Dr K.R. Lakshmanan v State of Tamil Nadu (1996), has upheld the distinction. The apex court, while applying the “predominance of skill” test (Chamarbaugwala), held that games where skill outweighs chance cannot be treated as gambling. Further, it clarified that the dominant element of the game determines the nature of the game.</p>.<p>In Lakshmanan, the Supreme Court explained that success in a game of skill requires superior knowledge, training, attention, experience, and adroitness on the part of the player. For example, in Satyanarayan, rummy was upheld as a skill-based game, while in Lakshmanan, horse racing was similarly recognised for requiring expertise. Both were found to satisfy the test of preponderance, requiring knowledge, training, experience, attention, and adroitness. By affirming that these activities rely predominantly on skill rather than chance, the courts decisively reinforced the principle that such pursuits are not chance, but legitimate games of skill.</p>.Online Gaming Act to be implemented from October 1: IT Minister Vaishnaw.<p>The Madras High Court, in All India Gaming Federation v. State of Tamil Nadu (2023), clarified that both online rummy and online poker qualify as games of skill and therefore, fall within the right to trade and business under Article 19(1)(g) and Article 301. The Karnataka High Court, in All India Gaming Federation v. State of Karnataka (2021), held as unconstitutional the ban on all forms of online gaming involving risk of money, irrespective of whether they were games of skill or chance, via the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act 2021. The court reasoned that the amendment to the Act was held to be violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, as it was unjustifiably selective and imposed an absolute embargo on all games of skill, thereby defying the principle of proportionality.</p>.<p>Furthermore, this categorisation of skill and chance has not been limited to legal discourse; it has also received attention from mathematical and statistical perspectives. A range of mathematical and statistical studies has reinforced the distinction between games of skill and games of chance by adopting a divergent approach. A 2023 study by the Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, found that success in rummy is significantly influenced by skill. Likewise, researchers at the Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi, concluded that online card games demand a predominance of skill for consistent success. In 2007, Noga Alon, a mathematician, demonstrated that poker is primarily skill-based, with outcomes shaped by a player’s ability to calculate odds and probabilities rather than mere luck.</p>.<p><strong>A doctrinal shift</strong></p>.<p>Together, judicial precedents and studies reaffirm that games where skill predominates, such as rummy, poker, horse racing, and fantasy sports, cannot be equated with gambling but are legitimate, constitutionally safeguarded activities rooted in expertise and strategy.</p>.<p>In the current context, PROGA, in its definition of an online money game, does not distinguish between skill and chance. The question that arises is whether the prior jurisprudence of ‘games of skill’ and ‘games of chance,’ along with the established tests, will now fall under the blanket umbrella of ORMGs. Under such a definition, variants of games like poker and rummy would be classified as ORMGs, which defies the very distinction that has existed since 1957, as established by the legal precedents. Sections 5, 6, and 7 of PROGA show a deviation from the precedents that differentiate between skill and chance. They unilaterally ban all games where real money is used, regardless of the level of skill required to play and win real money. This Act would essentially remove the intelligible differentia that the courts have established time and again.</p>.<p>If so, PROGA represents not just a legislative intervention but a doctrinal shift, raising important questions about the balance between regulatory objectives, constitutional guarantees under Articles 19(1)(g) and 301, and the continuing relevance of judicially evolved distinctions in the Indian gaming ecosystem.</p>.<p>ORMG platforms have challenged the PROGA before the Karnataka High Court, Delhi High Court, and the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The petitioners contend that the Act is ultra vires, vague, and disproportionate, and violates their fundamental rights under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. They further argue that the blanket ban disregards established judicial precedents, which have recognised skill-based gaming as a legitimate business activity.</p>.<p>The Supreme Court agreed to consolidate all similar challenges for a joint hearing starting September 8. Its decision on the petitions will be crucial, either reaffirming the distinction between skill and chance or endorsing a new doctrine. Is this the sunset of the sunrise sector? Meanwhile, on September 18, IT Minister Ashwini Vaishnaw announced that the PROGA, which bans India’s $23-billion online money gaming industry, will come into effect on October 1, while the rules for the DPDP Act, 2023, will be notified by September 28.</p>.<p><em>(Sudhanshu is an associate professor and Harsha is an assistant professor at NLSIU; Aditi is a research associate at the university. The team is working on a funded research project involving online gaming laws)</em></p><p>(Disclaimer: The views expressed above are the author's own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of DH)</p>
