India Court Postpones Hearing on Challenges to Gaming Ban
India’s online gaming sector remains stalled after the Supreme Court indicated that legal challenges to the nationwide real-money gaming ban will not be heard until early 2026. The delay follows requests from gaming companies seeking immediate judicial intervention against legislation that has effectively frozen operations across the industry.
During proceedings on December 11, a Supreme Court bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant reviewed an application from Head Digital Works (HDW), the operator behind the A23 Rummy platform. HDW and several other real-money gaming operators are contesting the constitutional validity of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act (PROGA), which parliament passed in August. Although petitioners pressed for urgent consideration, the court said the matter would be assigned to a three-judge bench and scheduled for a hearing in January.
Addressing arguments that the industry has already ground to a halt, the Chief Justice told counsel, “Everything is shut down.… We are listing in January. That is what I am promising.”
PROGA prohibits online platforms from offering any form of real-money gaming and applies uniformly across the sector. The legislation does not distinguish between games of chance and activities commonly described as skill-based, including rummy, fantasy sports, poker, and esports. Operators found in violation face penalties that can include prison sentences of up to three years, along with financial fines.
Supporters of the law maintain that the ban is necessary to curb harm associated with money-based gaming. The Centre for the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming has linked the “unchecked expansion” of real-money gaming to “financial fraud, money laundering, tax evasion and, in some cases, the financing of terrorism.” Lok Sabha member Bansuri Swaraj has also defended the legislation, writing that PROGA “unmasked the wolf for what it is” and arguing that operators had been “[hiding] behind the fig leaf of ‘skill’.”
Industry participants have challenged those claims. HDW has characterised the legislation as a “product of state paternalism” and has asked the Supreme Court to declare it unconstitutional.
Senior advocates C. Aryama Sundaram and Arvind Datar, appearing for HDW and other petitioners, told the court that the absence of a prompt hearing has had the same effect as direct enforcement. They argued that although PROGA has not yet been formally notified, the uncertainty surrounding the law has already caused widespread disruption.
According to submissions referenced during the hearing, banks, payment processors, and other intermediaries began pulling back services shortly after the law was published on August 22. HDW said it has earned no revenue for nearly three months while continuing to shoulder monthly operating expenses exceeding Rs100 million ($1.2 million). The company also disclosed that its workforce has been reduced from 606 employees to 178, and that foreign investor Clairvest has written off its Rs7.6-billion ($91 million) investment.
The impact extends beyond individual companies. By mid-November, banned real-money gaming platforms had reportedly recorded asset write-downs of more than $840 million, while an estimated 7,000 workers lost their jobs nationwide. Before the ban, the sector was said to support around 200,000 jobs and generate approximately Rs230 billion ($2.75 billion) in annual value.
The Supreme Court said the timing of the hearing reflects the constitutional issues raised by the petitions. The bench noted that cases involving the “vires of a statute” are generally referred to a three-judge bench. Challenges to PROGA are also closely connected to the earlier Gameskraft batch of cases, which examined whether state governments have the authority to regulate or prohibit online gaming. The current petitions raise a parallel question: whether parliament can impose a nationwide prohibition.
Because of this overlap, the court indicated that the matters should be considered together by a larger bench. Local media reports have suggested that the hearing is likely to take place on January 21, 2026, once the bench is formally constituted.
Industry representatives have warned that continued delays could have unintended consequences. According to iGaming Business, 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”.
Source:
India Court Delays Hearing on Real-Money Gaming Ban, news.worldcasinodirectory.com, December 12, 2025