Right to trade cannot impede on right to life: Madras HC upholds Tamil Nadu's real money gaming regulations

Division bench dismisses petitions filed by online gaming firms seeking suspension of legislation including night ban and Aadhaar-based KYC.
Madras High Court
Madras High Court(File photo | Express)
Updated on
3 min read

CHENNAI: The Madras High Court on Tuesday dismissed petitions filed by online real money gaming platforms seeking leniency in Tamil Nadu government's recent regulations including a night ban and compulsor Aadhar-based KYC registration. The court held that such games are subject to strict regulation as it has serious social repercussions.

A division bench comprising justices SM Subramaniam and K Rajasekar passed the orders in response to petitions pleading that the legislations -- section 5 r/w 14 of TN Prohibition of Online Gaming and Regulation of Online Games Act, 2022 along with TN Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025 -- be declared ultra vires.

"This Court is of the view that any online game or online entertainment is subject to regulation when it affects the public health of people at large. The focal test is that the ill-effects of such online activity must be directly linked to public health and must result in serious social repercussions if left unregulated. Any such online entertainment/game/trade then shall be subjected to regulation," the bench said.

It remarked that the state cannot remain a mute spectator when the population at large is exposed to serious physical, mental and financial risks due to constant exposure to a specific online entertainment/ games/ trade.

Madras High Court
Madras HC declines interim relief to online gaming firms challenging regulations on real money games

The bench held that the right to conduct trade enshrined in Article 19(1)(g), being a vital fundamental right, cannot be used to deter the people’s right to life under Article 21.

The petitions were filed by online gaming platforms including Play Games 24x7 Private Limited, Head Digital Works Private Limited, Junglee Games India Private Limited.

These companies had challenged the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Activity (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025. The main contentions were against the bar on under 18 minors from playing the games, mandatory know your client (KYC) registration with Aadhaar number, playing RMGs during blank hours- from 12 am to 5 am and the compulsory pop-up caution alerts for every thirty minutes after the initial one hour and setting of time bound monetary limits. They also stated the state’s act and regulations were repugnant with the Information Technology Act of the Centre.

Pointing to the reports on the negative effects of the online RMGs on the physical, mental and financial aspects of a player who in essence is not playing with another human but a pre-programmed computer, the bench held that it would be only fair to ensure the right to life under Article 21 of the player is protected which also encompasses his right to health.

It negated the contention of the online gaming firms that the restrictions of blank hours and age limit are paternalistic in nature.

Referring to the Supreme Court’s order in the Puttasamy case regarding right to privacy, the bench noted, the right to privacy carries with it, its own limitations and cannot be claimed as an absolute right. When put on a scale, a compelling public interest outweighs the right to privacy.

Upholding the state’s right to bring in such regulations, the bench said the State reserves its right to legislate matters related to public health and more specifically the State Government’s competence to legislate on online real money games remain undeterred by virtue of Entry 6 and 26 in List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution.

Advocate General PS Raman, Additional Advocate General Amit Anand Tiwari and advocate B Arvind Srevatsa represented the state government and Additional Solicitor General (ASG) ARL Sundaresan appeared for the Centre.

Concurring with the state government’s submissions over the reasons for initiating the regulations, the bench said the adverse effects are much larger to the people than the need for securing the individual right to free trade. Regulation becomes a priority to ensure the safety and protection of the general public and the actions of the government cannot be termed baseless or disproportionate.

It found no strong reason to dilute the Aadhaar requirement for registration because the two-factor authentication test provides for lesser manipulation or deceit.

Related Stories

No stories found.

X
Open in App
The New Indian Express
www.newindianexpress.com