The Karnataka government as of late started implementing the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2021, which condemns movements of every kind that fall under the umbrella of online gaming by bringing it under the extent of ‘betting and wagering’. The enactment subjects players taking an interest in such exercises to a punishment of up to 3 years of detainment and a fine of Rs 1 lakh. It is obvious that, by including even online ‘games of skill’ under the extent of the enactment, the government has ignored the difference between ‘games of skill’ versus ‘games of chance’, which lies at the core of recognizing betting from gaming. The term ‘game of skill’ undermines the expanding online gaming industry participants and imperils livelihoods.

Right now, no less than four writ petitions have been filed by the All India Gaming Federation (AIGF) and three other gaming organizations, challenging the constitutional validity of the Karnataka Police (Amendment) Act, 2021. The petitioners have contended that the boycott is arbitrary, ambiguous, and unreasonable and doesn’t meet the proportionality test, and should in this way, be struck down.

Kerala High Court Makes Way for Online Rummy
While one state has prohibited all games, skill or chance-based through enactment, the Kerala High Court struck down a notification by the government which restricted online rummy. The Court observed the notification to be illegal for not qualifying as a sensible limitation under Article 19(6) of the Constitution of India. The Judgment lifts the prohibition on Online Rummy while recognizing it is prevalently a game of skill over the possibility. The Court highlighted the ‘substantial degree of skill test’ and decided that games that include the prevalence of skill over possibility are legitimate and just games where the element of chance overwhelms over skill would be viewed as gambling and subsequently, be restricted.

Legal Status of Online Gaming in the Different States in India
‘Sports’ and ‘betting and gambling’ fall under the ambit of the State List as given under the List-II of Seventh Schedule in the Constitution of India. In like manner, various states have gone to various lengths to manage the guidelines of gambling and sports.

In September 2021, the Madras High Court had struck down Part II of the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police laws (Amendment) Act, 1930, which set down restrictions on money-based online games of skill. The Court considered the amendment to be ‘irrational, unreasonable and arbitrary’ limitations on fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India – which protects the right to practice any trade or profession in India. It further held that the State Legislatures’ power to enact laws on ‘gambling and betting’ under the Constitution of India is restricted to betting on games of chance. Further, even though the State Legislatures might enact laws to regulate skill games, and altogether restriction on a game of skill was seen as arbitrary and absurd.

Similarly, the Telangana Gaming (Amendment) Act, 2017, and the Andhra Pradesh Gaming (Amendment) Act, 2020, deny all types of gaming for money, be it games of skill or games of chance. While, under the Nagaland Prohibition of Gambling and Promotion and Regulation of Online Games of Skill Act, 2016, “Gambling means and includes wagering or betting on games of chance however does exclude wagering or betting on games of skill.” This Act gives the issuance of licenses important for participation in ‘games of skill’, and it likewise gives a timetable that enrolls games that qualify as “‘games of skill’. Along these lines, there is no ambiguity regarding which games are allowed under the Nagaland law. Essentially, the Sikkim Online Gaming (Regulation) Act 2008 has installed a comparable methodology of authorized online gaming as envisioned in Nagaland.

A couple of states, including Bihar, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, have taken on the Central Public Gambling Act, 1867. The position of law in regards to online gaming under this Act stays hazy as of now.

The changed positions taken by various states feature the requirement for consistency in the guideline of online gaming.

Public Interest Litigations (PIL(s)): A Source of Disarray for Gaming Laws and Policies in India
The Indian Courts have managed diverse online games to explain their order as a ‘game of skill’ or ‘game of chance’ to choose the applicability of various state gambling guidelines on them. While there is no agreement among the State Governments on a uniform methodology towards online gaming guidelines, the judiciary has delivered numerous decisions in a few Public Interest Litigations (“PIL”) that have additionally bewildered the lawful legitimacy of online gaming in India.

This discussion has been broadly talked about in various decisions of different high courts in the nation. Most as of late, on account of Junglee Games India Private Limited. v. The State of Tamil Nadu, the Madras High Court lifted the outright restriction on online gaming forced in Tamil Nadu.

The Kerala notification and the Tamil Nadu Act resulted from PILs filed in the individual high courts. The incongruity in the circumstance is positively not lost when both were ultimately struck down because of PILs filed against the notification/act regardless.

The Allahabad High Court is presently managing a PIL, wherein the boycott is being looked for on online betting sites that allegedly cheat the general population by controlling outcomes. presently, the Court has asked the Uttar Pradesh government to file a counter-testimony answer to the PIL.

As of late, the Delhi High court additionally excused a PIL that raised the issue of the dependence on online games among youngsters and guided the Center in formulating a national policy shielding kids from online games fixation and abuse. The Center answered to the Court underlining that the issue of betting and sports explicitly falls under the space of the states and should be managed appropriately.

The previously mentioned PILs address just a minor level of the continuous cases that have as of now been or alternately are at present being chosen by the courts. This has made only one more channel for improving the ambiguity on the lawful situation of online gaming in India. The Supreme Court has over and over featured the abuse of PILs and how they waste the time and efforts of the courts.

On account of online gaming, as can be interpreted from the previously mentioned PILs, it isn’t only the courts’ assets that have been taken advantage of. Indeed, even the state councils have consistently been coordinated to follow up on the consequence of a PIL, notwithstanding the matter being enrolled under their area, i.e., the State List, in any case.

It is just in light of a legitimate concern for the states to detail strategies on the guideline of online gaming through the precise meetings.

Way Forward
Online gaming has been blasting, especially; India’s esports market size has rapidly scaled to Rs 3 billion in FY 2021. It is relied upon to arrive at Rs 11 billion by FY 2025. Basically, states perceive the absence of consistency in the legitimate position of online gaming in India. The disarray concerning the equivalent has been enhanced by the numerous PILs filed and engaged by the courts.

The Center and the State government should cooperate to show up at a shared conviction on the guideline of online gaming and explain the differentiation between a game of skill and a game of chance to clear the smoke circling the online gaming industry since the 1950s.

This has become significantly more pivotal considering eSports has been enrolled as a medaled event in Asian Games 2022. Consequently, a well-defined regulatory framework for eSports is expected to guarantee a positive outcome for the nation and its players in the Asian Games 2022.

Credits: Financial Express