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.

Comments

Patna High Court Declares Bihar’s Reservation Amendments Ultra Vires

In a landmark decision, the Patna High Court has invalidated the Bihar government's legislative attempt to increase reservations for backward classes. The court's ruling focused on procedural flaws and the absence of a robust empirical basis for the hike, sparking a debate on judicial intervention in affirmative action policies. Background and Rationale Behind Setting Aside Bihar Reservation Increase Law The Bihar government had proposed an increase in reservations to address socio-economic disparities faced by backward classes. However, the court found that the state failed to follow due process, which includes conducting a thorough empirical study to justify the policy change. This procedural oversight led to the court's decision to strike down the increase. The High Court emphasized the necessity of a data-driven approach for policy changes related to reservations. The ruling underscored that without solid empirical evidence, such policies could not be justified within...

Pune Porsche Crash: Father of Minor Granted Bail

Image Credit: tv9marathi A Pune court has granted bail to the minor’s father, Vishal Agarwal, who faced charges under the Juvenile Justice Act for neglect and endangering the child by allowing him to drive without a license and consume alcohol. Additionally, bar owners and managers were arrested for serving alcohol to minors. The father, already in custody for other related charges, was implicated in the alleged manipulation of his son’s blood samples and in a separate case of kidnapping his driver. Advocate Prashant Patil argued that Vishal Agarwal's arrest was unlawful, contending that the charges were non-cognizable offenses and required a notice under the Criminal Procedure Code. Mr. Patil also highlighted contradictions in police reports, where the minor was listed as the accused in one FIR and as a victim in another. Also Read: Delhi High Court Stays Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's Bail in Excise Policy Case Earlier Proceedings in the Pune Porsche Crash Inc...

Counsel's failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review: Bombay High Court

By - Sameeksha Negi* The Bombay High Court has observed that “If Counsel has not urged a point, the fact that there were written submissions is immaterial if those written submissions were never in fact argued.” The Bench also added that “Counsel’s failure to argue written submissions is not a ground of review or, I dare say, even appeal. It is no ground to assail any order of any judge of any court.” The bench was hearing a review petition filed for seeking reinstatement of original arbitration petition on grounds some of which were never argued and others never pleaded and the said petition was filed after the original arbitration petition was fully argued, and then decided by pronouncement in open court. Also Read - The Pension Scheme for freedom fighters cannot be construed in a manner that the requirements prescribed are rendered a dead letter: Bombay HC According to Justice GS Patel allowing parties to take grounds in review pleas or in appeals that were not argued initi...

Lawgic Simplified

Search This Blog