India's Supreme Court dismisses gaming firms' review petitions, leaving Tamil Nadu and Karnataka bans on online games for stakes in force
India's Supreme Court has dismissed ten petitions seeking review of its May 27 judgment upholding Tamil Nadu and Karnataka laws that ban online games played for stakes. The bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan decided the petitions in chambers, rejected requests for an oral hearing and found "no merit" in them. The signed order, dated October 15, was uploaded on October 26.
2 Min Read
Overview
- The bench of Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan dismissed ten review petitions, led by Junglee Games India Private Limited v. State of Tamil Nadu.
- The court rejected applications for an oral hearing and said it found "no merit" in the petitions.
- The order is dated October 15, 2026; the signed copy was uploaded on October 26.
- The May 27 judgment upholding the Tamil Nadu and Karnataka laws stands.
What the order says
The two-page order covers review petitions against three batches of appeals: Civil Appeals 6124-6131 and 6132-6143 of 2023, from Tamil Nadu, and Civil Appeals 8275-8279 of 2026, from Karnataka. The judges condoned the delay in filing and rejected the applications for an oral hearing. "We have carefully gone through the Review Petitions and the connected papers. We find no merit in the Review Petitions and the same are, accordingly, dismissed," the order says.
Junglee Games is the only petitioner named in the order's case title. Indian gaming-law outlet G2G News reported that the other petitions were filed by Head Digital Works, Play Games24x7 and the Federation of Indian Fantasy Sports.
The May 27 judgment
In the judgment, reported as 2026 INSC 594, the same bench allowed the appeals brought by Tamil Nadu and Karnataka and set aside rulings of the Madras and Karnataka High Courts that had struck down the states' laws. It declared the challenged provisions of Tamil Nadu's 2021 amendment and its online gambling law, and Sections 2, 3, 6, 8 and 9 of Karnataka's 2021 amendment, constitutionally valid.
The court held that states may legislate on betting under Entry 34 of the State List even when the underlying game involves skill. It said betting or wagering on any game, "be it a game of skill," does not receive protection under Article 19 of the Constitution unless the legislature makes an exception.
A separate constitutional challenge to the federal Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 is pending before a three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, G2G News reported.
The state-level bans contrast with the Philippines' PAGCOR-licensed market, where online gaming for local players operates under licences from the state-owned regulator rather than being prohibited outright.
Cite This Article
Topics In This Story
Related Countries
Daniel Tan is an editor at AskSpinner News who believes industry writing can be informed, approachable and engaging. Daniel turns complex subjects into accessible articles and reports, giving readers a welcoming way into unfamiliar topics and room to build their understanding as they read.
More From This Author
