The Supreme Court on May 27, 2026 upheld the laws enacted by Tamil Nadu and Karnataka to regulate and prohibit online betting and gambling activities. The judgment strengthens Online betting and gambling laws in India and overturns the decisions of the Madras and Karnataka High Courts. The Court confirmed that States can regulate betting and wagering, including games of skill played for stakes.
Background of the Dispute
The case arose from appeals against the judgments of the Madras High Court and Karnataka High Court. The Madras High Court had invalidated parts of the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021, and the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2022/2023.
The High Court ruled that betting under Entry 34 of List II could not be separated from gambling. It also held that the State could not prohibit games of skill played for stakes. Similarly, the Karnataka High Court struck down key provisions of the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2021 and stopped the State from interfering with online gaming businesses.
Arguments Before the Supreme Court
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, assisted by Advocate-on-Record Sabarish Subramanian, represented Tamil Nadu. The State argued that the rise of online gaming caused addiction, financial losses, debt and suicides. Therefore, it justified legislative intervention under Entries 1, 6, 33 and 34 of List II.
For Karnataka, Additional Advocate General Prateek K. Chadha argued that the law did not ban pure games of skill. Instead, it targeted betting and wagering involving money and uncertain outcomes.
Gaming companies represented by Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Arvind P. Datar, Aryama Sundaram and Mukul Rohatgi argued that rummy, poker and fantasy sports involve skill and receive protection under Article 19(1)(g). They claimed the State laws created disproportionate restrictions on legitimate businesses.
Supreme Court’s Findings
Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan rejected the interpretation adopted by the High Courts. The Bench held that when a person wagers money on an uncertain outcome, the nature of the underlying game becomes irrelevant for legislative competence.
The Court clarified that games of skill may receive constitutional protection. However, States can regulate or prohibit betting on such games. The judgment stated that Online betting and gambling laws protect public health, maintain public order and address concerns such as addiction and financial harm.
The Court also considered the Justice Chandru Committee report. The report highlighted issues including gaming addiction, monetary losses, indebtedness and suicides linked to online money gaming.
Final Directions
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals filed by Tamil Nadu and Karnataka. It upheld the validity of the State enactments and set aside the judgments of the Madras High Court and Karnataka High Court.
The Court concluded that States have the authority to regulate and prohibit online betting and wagering activities when such measures protect public health and public order.
