The All India Gaming Federation has challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Government's ban on online poker .The government had recently introduced amendments to the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 in a bid to ban various forms of online games and gambling..Various petitions challenging these amendments, in so far as they ban online rummy, are already pending before the High Court. .On Monday a Bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee issued notice in the latest plea challenging the online poker ban and tagged it with the pending petitions. Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram and Advocates Rahul Unnikrishnan and Vishakh Ranjit represented the petitioner-Federation. .The All India Gaming Federation has contended that online poker is a game of skill and, therefore, cannot be banned on the premise that it is a form of gambling. .To show that the platform has been self-regulating its operations, the federation has also highlighted a "Charter on Online Games of Skill" that its members follow. .Inter alia, by this charter, members are permitted to offer only skill-based games, the games can be offered only in State where they are legal and after procuring applicable licences, no games can be offered to persons below 18 years of age, the privacy policy of the game have to published, confidential data cannot be shared, information about responsible gaming is provided, self-administered tests are made available to test for addiction, audits are carried out and grievance redressal mechanisms are available. .Notably, an expert committee has also been constituted to decide whether any game offered by any member is a game of skill or not, the Federation says. All online fantasy games, online poker and online rummy have to be approved by this Expert Committee, it adds. .The Federation goes on to contend:Poker is a game of skill, in which mathematics, psychology, practice all determining the success of the player. As such, it does not fall under the category of "betting and gambling". The Law Commission of India, in its 276th report, has also categorically stated that poker is a game of skill.Other States (14 States or Union Territories) have specifically exempted the application of the Public Gambling Act, 1867 to games of skill. The majority of the States treat poker as a game of skill.Poker competitions constitute a business activity that is protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.The Tamil Nadu Government has acted beyond its legislative competence in banning online poker, on a combined reading of Sections 3A and 11 of the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, as amended in 2021.Section 3A effectively bans all games of skill with the inclusion of the undefined phrase "any other game." As such, it is unconstitutional for being vague. Even if poker were not a game of skill, only the Parliament has the legislative competence to enact a law dealing with online poker since it is carried over media (telephones, wireless, broadcasting and other like forms of communication), which is a subject covered under Entry 31 of List I of Schedule VII to the Constitution (the Union List)The challenged provisions are disproportionate.The challenged provisions violate the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution, particularly since poker played physically is still permitted.The Supreme Court has categorically held that betting or wagering on a game of skill would not amount to “gaming” in KR Lakshmanan's case..On the above grounds, the Federation has urged the Court to strike down Sections 3A and 11 of the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, as amended by the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021.The matter will be heard next on April 21.
The All India Gaming Federation has challenged the constitutional validity of the Tamil Nadu Government's ban on online poker .The government had recently introduced amendments to the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 in a bid to ban various forms of online games and gambling..Various petitions challenging these amendments, in so far as they ban online rummy, are already pending before the High Court. .On Monday a Bench headed by Chief Justice Sanjib Banerjee issued notice in the latest plea challenging the online poker ban and tagged it with the pending petitions. Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram and Advocates Rahul Unnikrishnan and Vishakh Ranjit represented the petitioner-Federation. .The All India Gaming Federation has contended that online poker is a game of skill and, therefore, cannot be banned on the premise that it is a form of gambling. .To show that the platform has been self-regulating its operations, the federation has also highlighted a "Charter on Online Games of Skill" that its members follow. .Inter alia, by this charter, members are permitted to offer only skill-based games, the games can be offered only in State where they are legal and after procuring applicable licences, no games can be offered to persons below 18 years of age, the privacy policy of the game have to published, confidential data cannot be shared, information about responsible gaming is provided, self-administered tests are made available to test for addiction, audits are carried out and grievance redressal mechanisms are available. .Notably, an expert committee has also been constituted to decide whether any game offered by any member is a game of skill or not, the Federation says. All online fantasy games, online poker and online rummy have to be approved by this Expert Committee, it adds. .The Federation goes on to contend:Poker is a game of skill, in which mathematics, psychology, practice all determining the success of the player. As such, it does not fall under the category of "betting and gambling". The Law Commission of India, in its 276th report, has also categorically stated that poker is a game of skill.Other States (14 States or Union Territories) have specifically exempted the application of the Public Gambling Act, 1867 to games of skill. The majority of the States treat poker as a game of skill.Poker competitions constitute a business activity that is protected under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.The Tamil Nadu Government has acted beyond its legislative competence in banning online poker, on a combined reading of Sections 3A and 11 of the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, as amended in 2021.Section 3A effectively bans all games of skill with the inclusion of the undefined phrase "any other game." As such, it is unconstitutional for being vague. Even if poker were not a game of skill, only the Parliament has the legislative competence to enact a law dealing with online poker since it is carried over media (telephones, wireless, broadcasting and other like forms of communication), which is a subject covered under Entry 31 of List I of Schedule VII to the Constitution (the Union List)The challenged provisions are disproportionate.The challenged provisions violate the right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution, particularly since poker played physically is still permitted.The Supreme Court has categorically held that betting or wagering on a game of skill would not amount to “gaming” in KR Lakshmanan's case..On the above grounds, the Federation has urged the Court to strike down Sections 3A and 11 of the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930, as amended by the Tamil Nadu Gaming and Police Laws (Amendment) Act, 2021.The matter will be heard next on April 21.
