Madras HC strikes down Tamil Nadu law banning online games with stakes; calls it excessive and disproportionate

By - Divisha Srivastava*

The Madras High Court has struck down the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police law (Amendment) Act, 2021. The said amendment prohibited high-stake internet activities like poker and rummy.

The amendment to the Gaming Act, 1930 was brought into effect for imposing ban on online gaming. The enterprises filed a case challenging the said amendment, claiming that it is unconstitutional. Since 1968, the Supreme Court has stated that rummy is a game of skill rather than a game of chance. As a result, the Supreme Court has ruled that online rummy cannot be prohibited.

The state objected to the petition, claiming that young people are wagering in large quantities of money on online games, and that there have been examples of young people committing suicide after losing money.

Also Read - Names of acquitted persons cannot be removed from records in absence of statutory backing: Madras High Court.

According to the bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee and Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy, such a prohibition would be illegal and in violation of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India (right to practise any profession, or to carry on any occupation, trade or business). Considering this, the court declared Part II of the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021, which amends the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 to be unconstitutional.

“...the legislation assailed herein has to be regarded as something done by the legislature capriciously, irrationally and without adequate determining principle such that it is excessive and disproportionate,” the court held.

Also Read - Additional slot cannot be provided in Tokyo Paralympics says International Paralympic Committee; SC disposes of Naresh kumar Sharma's plea.

However the court noted that this ruling shall not be regarded as a prohibition on introduction of a legislation for regulating betting and gambling, if such legislation conforms to the “constitutional sense of propriety”.

CLICK HERE TO READ JUDGMENT.

*Divisha Srivastava is a 1^st year student pursuing B.B.A.LL.B from S.N.D.T School of Law, Mumbai, Maharashtra.