Union Government told the Supreme Court that unregulated real-money gaming has become a high-risk zone linked to terror financing, money laundering and rising suicides, estimating nearly ₹20,000 crore in annual losses. It urged strong regulation to protect public welfare.
The Union government informed the Supreme Court that unregulated real-money online gaming has transformed into a high-risk environment associated with terror financing, money laundering, and increasing cases of suicides, estimating that nearly Rs 20,000 crore is lost by Indians annually on such platforms.
This statement was part of a detailed affidavit addressing constitutional challenges to the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, initiated by major industry players such as Head Digital Works Pvt Ltd.
The Centre emphasized the public health and societal issues linked to real-money gaming. Data from various states revealed 32 suicides in Karnataka from January 2023 to July 2025, 20 in Telangana last year, and over 30 in Tamil Nadu in recent years.
The affidavit claimed that nearly 45 crore individuals have been negatively affected.
Asking the Court to dismiss the industry’s invocation of Article 19(1)(g), it urged,
“There can be no right to profession or trade at the cost of human lives,”
Regarding legislative authority, the Centre stated that Entries 31 and 97 of List I grant Parliament the power to regulate the digital realm.
It criticized state-level responses for creating “regulatory chaos,” which necessitated the 2025 legislation aimed at establishing uniform standards and addressing enforcement gaps stemming from issues of extra-territoriality and cross-border operations.
The prohibition does not apply to e-sports or online games without real-money stakes.
In a separate affidavit submitted to a bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and KV Viswanathan, which has consolidated challenges from multiple High Courts, the Centre reiterated that unregulated gaming platforms aggressively promote themselves through celebrity endorsements and influencer campaigns, disproportionately affecting youth and vulnerable populations.
It argued that the new legislation was intended to protect the public by mitigating the “widespread and harmful impact” of these platforms on individuals, families, and society.
Previously, in November, the Court had directed the Union government to provide a comprehensive response to multiple petitions.
Earlier, On September 26, after a request was made for an expedited hearing of the petitions challenging the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, Chief Justice BR Gavai agreed to list the matter.
Recently, the Court permitted the Centre’s request to transfer pending cases from the High Courts challenging the Act. The Karnataka High Court had postponed the hearings on writ petitions against the newly enacted Online Gaming Act, 2025, noting that the Centre sought to consolidate similar challenges in the Supreme Court.
Head Digital Works, the parent company of A23, contested the Act’s validity in the Karnataka High Court, arguing that it infringes on fundamental constitutional rights, including the freedom to conduct business under Article 19(1)(g), and violates the established legal distinction between skill-based and chance-based games.
The Union government informed the Delhi High Court that it is in the process of notifying the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, and plans to establish a regulatory authority with supporting regulations under the new law.
The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Bill, 2025 was introduced in the Lok Sabha on August 20, swiftly passed by both Houses of Parliament within two days via a voice vote, and received Presidential assent on August 22.
Case Title: Head Digital Works Private Limited v. Union of India
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
