Indian court postpones review of real-money gaming ban

India’s online gaming sector continues to face uncertainty after the Supreme Court confirmed that legal challenges to the country’s real-money gaming ban will not be heard until early 2026. The decision follows requests from gaming operators seeking urgent judicial intervention against legislation that has effectively brought large parts of the industry to a halt.

On December 11, a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant considered an application from Head Digital Works (HDW), the operator of A23 Rummy, which asked the court to list its case for immediate hearing. HDW, along with other real-money gaming operators, is contesting the constitutional validity of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act (PROGA), which parliament passed in August. While the court acknowledged the seriousness of the issues raised, it indicated that the matter would be taken up by a three-judge bench and scheduled for hearing in January.

Addressing arguments that the industry has already collapsed due to the legislation, the Chief Justice said, “Everything is shut down.… We are listing in January. That is what I am promising.”

PROGA was enacted with limited parliamentary debate and introduces a nationwide prohibition on online platforms offering real-money gaming services. The law does not distinguish between games of chance and formats that operators often classify as skill-based, including rummy, poker, fantasy sports, esports, and similar offerings. Violations can result in penalties that include prison sentences of up to three years, along with financial fines.

Supporters of the law have argued that the ban addresses serious social and financial risks associated with money-based gaming. The Centre for the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming has linked what it described as the “unchecked expansion” of real-money gaming to issues such as “financial fraud, money laundering, tax evasion and, in some cases, the financing of terrorism.”

Members of parliament have also defended the legislation in strong terms. Lok Sabha member Bansuri Swaraj described the law as having “unmasked the wolf for what it is,” portraying the sector as a damaging social influence. She added that the Act prevents operators from “[hiding] behind the fig leaf of ‘skill’.”

Industry participants, however, have challenged both the scope and intent of the law. HDW has characterized PROGA as a “product of state paternalism” and has asked the Supreme Court to strike it down as unconstitutional.

During the hearing, senior advocates C. Aryama Sundaram and Arvind Datar, representing HDW and other petitioners, argued that postponing judicial review has had the practical effect of enforcing the ban, even though PROGA has not yet been formally notified.

According to submissions referenced in court, banks, payment processors, and other intermediaries began withdrawing services shortly after the law was published on August 22. HDW told the court that it has generated no revenue for nearly three months while continuing to face monthly operating costs exceeding Rs100 million ($1.2 million).

The company also disclosed significant workforce reductions, stating that employee numbers fell from 606 to 178 following the passage of the law. In addition, HDW said that its foreign investor, Clairvest, has written off an investment valued at Rs7.6 billion ($91 million).

The wider impact on the industry has been severe. By mid-November, banned real-money gaming platforms reportedly recorded asset write-downs of more than $840 million. An estimated 7,000 workers have lost their jobs nationwide, according to figures cited during proceedings. Before the ban, the sector was estimated to support around 200,000 jobs and generate approximately Rs230 billion ($2.75 billion) in annual value.

Top casinos in India

100% up to

₹15000

Overall Rating

92

Visit Casino Read Review

200% up to

₹20000

Overall Rating

91

Visit Casino Read Review

The Supreme Court explained that the delay reflects the constitutional complexity of the issues involved. The bench noted that cases challenging the “vires of a statute” are generally assigned to a three-judge bench. The petitions against PROGA are closely connected to the previously argued Gameskraft batch, which examines whether state governments have the authority to regulate or prohibit online gaming.

The current challenges raise a parallel question: whether parliament has the power to impose a nationwide ban on online gaming activities. According to the court, the overlap between these legal questions requires consolidated consideration by a larger bench.

Local media reports indicate that the hearing is expected to take place on January 21, 2026, once the three-judge bench is formally constituted.

Industry representatives have warned that continued delays could accelerate the movement of players to offshore platforms. Jaya Chahar, founder and CEO of JCDC Sports, said the ban “pushes fan engagement away from regulated Indian platforms into unregulated offshore spaces, which defeats the very intent of consumer protection”.

Until the Supreme Court hears the case, India’s real-money gaming sector remains in a state of legal and commercial uncertainty, with operators, workers, and investors awaiting clarity on the future of the industry.

Source:

India Court Delays Hearing on Real-Money Gaming Ban, worldcasinodirectory.com, December 12, 2025