The Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (PROGA), marks shift in India’s approach to online gaming. It enforces a nationwide ban on online games played with money. The government aims to curb addiction, financial distress, and illicit activities linked to online money games. However, PROGA raises important questions about fundamental rights, regulation, and federal authority.
Fundamental Rights and Online Money Gaming
PROGA bans all online games involving money, including games of skill. Adults often play such games for thrill and monetary rewards. Critics argue this ban violates the constitutional right to free speech and expression. They compare online gaming to stock market trading, which also involves skill and financial risk but remains legal. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regulates stock trading but has not banned it outright despite high losses among young investors. This contrast marks the constitutional debate over whether online money gaming should be protected as a fundamental right.
Regulation Versus Prohibition
Instead of a blanket ban, regulation could be an alternative. Stock markets operate under SEBI’s strict regulatory framework that includes licensing, risk disclosures, and trading restrictions. A similar system could be applied to online gaming. Possible measures include age limits, compulsory registration, deposit caps, loss limits, and mandatory risk warnings. Such safeguards would protect players while allowing skill-based gaming to continue. This approach balances public interest and individual freedom better than an absolute ban.
Federalism and Legislative Competence
Online gaming falls under the State List in India’s Constitution, meaning states have the power to regulate betting and gambling. PROGA is a central law banning online money games nationwide. This raises concerns about federal overreach. The act’s inclusion of states as persons subject to the ban adds to the conflict. States with legal online gaming laws face direct prohibition under PROGA. This issue echoes the US Supreme Court’s 2018 ruling that states have the right to regulate sports betting without federal interference. The Indian scenario questions the extent of Parliament’s power to legislate on state subjects for national interest.
Social Impact and Legislative Intent
PROGA reflects the government’s intent to address social harms from online money gaming. Addiction, financial losses, and links to illegal activities motivated the law. The act aims to create a uniform national policy for online gaming. However, critics argue the law is too broad and heavy-handed. It bans even trivial stakes and skill-based games. This may stifle a growing industry and ignore the possibility of safer, regulated gaming environments. The challenge lies in balancing social protection with economic and personal freedoms.
Questions for UPSC:
- Critically discuss the constitutional challenges involved in regulating online gaming in India, focusing on fundamental rights and federalism.
- Analyse the role of regulatory bodies like the Securities and Exchange Board of India in balancing market freedom and consumer protection; examine parallels with online gaming regulation.
- Estimate the social and economic impacts of banning versus regulating online gaming in India, including effects on youth and the digital economy.
- Point out the significance of the anti-commandeering doctrine in federal systems; how does it apply to state versus central regulation of gambling and betting?
