TLDR
- India’s Supreme Court dismissed 10 review petitions led by Junglee Games India on 15 October.
- The decision lets Tamil Nadu and Karnataka keep their bans on online games played for stakes.
- The bans also apply to skill-based games when money is wagered.
- Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan ruled without an open-court hearing.
- A curative petition is the only remaining option, and it is used only in rare cases.
India’s Supreme Court has rejected 10 review petitions challenging its ruling on state online gaming bans. The petitions were led by Junglee Games India.
The decision means Tamil Nadu and Karnataka can continue to ban online games played for stakes. This includes skill-based games when money is wagered.
Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan dismissed the petitions on 15 October. They did so without an open-court hearing, according to MediaNama.
The Economic Times reported that the judges reviewed the filings and related documents. They found no basis to allow the review petitions.
What the May Ruling Said
The petitions asked the court to reconsider its judgment from 27 May. That ruling overturned High Court decisions that had struck down the gaming restrictions in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka.
Under the May ruling, calling a game skill-based does not protect it from a state ban when wagering is involved. The dispute centers on games played for money or other stakes.
The gaming industry had argued that games of skill and games of chance should be treated differently when bets are placed. The Supreme Court rejected this claim, pointing to concerns about addiction and law and order.
The ruling allowed the states to ban such games even where skill is part of play. The dismissal of the review petitions keeps that approach in place.
Operators Lose Their Review Challenge
Junglee Games, Play Games24x7, and Head Digital Works were among the operators that supported the earlier High Court rulings. Industry associations also backed those decisions.
Their case depended on treating skill-based gaming differently when judging whether the state bans were valid. The Supreme Court did not accept that argument in May.
The review petitions gave the operators a chance to ask the court to look at the judgment again. After examining the material submitted, the bench dismissed the challenges.
As a result, the operators did not regain the protection they had won in the High Courts. The May judgment stands without change.
The latest decision brings the review process in these matters to an end. The court declined to reconsider the outcome through the ordinary review route.
One option still remains for the petitioners. They can file curative petitions to seek relief.
However, curative petitions are used only in very rare cases. They are meant to address a serious miscarriage of justice or abuse of the judicial process.
A curative petition faces a higher bar than an ordinary legal challenge. For now, the bans in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka on online games played for stakes remain in force.
