Hc directs centre to respond on plea against rmg ban law

Hc directs centre to respond on plea against rmg ban law

The court has adjourned to September 8 the hearing on a petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the newly-enacted Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming (PROG) Act, 2025.

The High Court of Karnataka has adjourned to September 8 the hearing on a petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the newly-enactedPromotion and Regulation of Online Gaming (PROG) Act, 2025, which banned all online Real Money Games (RMGs), be it games of skill, chance, or both.

Justice B. M. Shyam Prasad, before whom the petition filed by online gaming company, Head Digital Works Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi, which offers online games in the name of A23, came up for hearing, also directed the Central government to file statement of objections by September 8 on the interim prayer sought in the petition for staying the implementation of the new act against online games of skill.

Earlier, Senior Advocate C. Aryama Sundaram, appearing for the petitioner, told the court the petitioner would not seek interim plea for staying implementation of the PROG Act against the online games of skill like rummy and poker, in which betting was considered lawful prior to enactment of the new law, if the Central government undertakes that PROG Act, which received President’s assent on August 22, would not be notified during the pendency of the petition.

Natural follow-up

However, Solicitor General of India Tushar Mehta told the Court that there can be a possibility of notifying the legislation as notification of a new law is a natural legislative function after receipt of assent from the President and there is no need for informing anyone, including the petitioner, in advance on the notification of the new law.

‘Interesting case’

Meanwhile, Mr. Mehta told the Court the present case would be an interesting one as the court, for the first time, would be examining the legislative competency of Parliament to enact the law regulating online gaming.

When Mr. Sundaram pointed out the High Court of Karnataka in 2022 had struck down a similar law enacted by the Karnataka State government banning online games, Mr. Mehta said in that case the online gaming companies had contended only Parliament had power to enact a law regulating online gaming and not the States but in the present case the petitioner contended Parliament is not competent to enact the law.

Game of skills

The petitioner-company has specifically challenged the validity of Sections 2(1)(g), 5, 6, 7 and 9 of the Act, which, besides banning even online games of skill, also treats violations of the provisions of the Act as a cognisable and non-bailable criminal offence.

The main contention of the petitioner is PROG Act is contrary to the settled principle of law laid down by the Supreme Court many decades ago that games of skill, involving risking of money or otherwise, are ‘not things outside commerce’ but a legitimate business activity protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.