Card games have been a controversial topic of discussion since Mahabharat and exist even today, legally or illegally. In today’s time, the risks of a game that involves some kind of consideration are taken more seriously than before simply because the law cannot allow money transactions based on fate. Moreover, when the internet is so easily accessible by anyone and everyone, laws regarding the same have to be strictly considered. In a country like India, illiteracy attracts people to look for ways to earn easy money laws regarding the same have to be in order and taken more seriously.
WHAT
IS THE LEGAL ASPECT OF ONLINE GAMING?
Law
recognizes two kinds of offline and online forms of gaming and gambling, i.e.
the game of skill and game of chance. Games of skill are not included in the
definition of gambling. The State Acts effectively leave it up to the
individual states to determine what constitutes a game of skill. Every state
has its legislation on gambling, and most states have an exception for games of
skill, but these legislations are old; therefore, they do not clearly define or
enumerate which games fall within this skill category. This further means that
what is permitted in one state might be an offence in another. The Public
Gambling Act of 1867 is the central law on the matter, and it has been adopted
by several Indian states, including Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, and Madhya Pradesh.
Other Indian states have adopted their laws to regulate gaming and gambling
within their territories.
It
should be noted that state legislatures have been adopted before the
introduction of virtual or online gambling in India, and hence references to
gaming/gambling in respective state legislatures are limited to physical
premises only, except for Sikkim and Nagaland, which are the only states that
have enacted legislation on online gaming. After reviewing the state gambling
laws for online gambling in India, it was discovered that, except for Orissa
and Assam, the majority of states have omitted ‘games of skill’ from the
application of their respective gaming/gambling laws. Furthermore, under the
laws of West Bengal, Nagaland, and Sikkim, playing such sports, such as ‘Poker,’
online and offline is allowed, subject to obtaining a licence from the relevant
state authorities. However, this will only occur within the respective state’s
geographical boundaries. Gambling is only legal in Goa if it is done in
government-approved casinos.
COURT’S
OPINION IN RELATION TO ONLINE CARD GAMES
In
the case of State of AP v. K. Satyanarayana (1968)[i], the Supreme Court
declared Rummy to be a “game of skill.” However, the Court stated
that if the gaming house profits from the game of Rummy, it can be considered a
crime under the laws of the state of Andhra Pradesh. SC also noted that the
three-card game, which goes by numerous names such as flush, brag, and so on,
is a pure chance game.[ii]
The
Court in the case of Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monica Lakhanpal[iii], the Court held that if
a game of skill is played with stakes, it does not amount to gambling and that
playing games of skill for money are legal only in the physical form; online
games cannot be compared to real games. Further, the Court also opined that using
the prize money to attract business or allure gamers is illegal, and if online
sites are taking a share of the winning hand, it is illegal because they simply
become a virtual gambling house.
Before the case of Dominance Games Pvt. The Ltd. V. State of Gujarat[iv], the question of whether Poker is a “game of skill” or a “game of chance” was never thoroughly debated in any court in India. It was held that Poker is a ‘game of chance’ and therefore amounts to gambling under the Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887. The Court made the following observation that in the game of Poker, the players have no control or say over the cards they are dealt, and the final result is determined solely by fate or chance, depending on how the cards are dealt. To bet, putting on a poker face is a kind of bluffing or lying, and the so-called tactic is not a skill. The result is also determined by a player’s ability to expend money and how full his pockets are. The Court clarified that Rummy is not the same as Poker in that it is a game of deception, bluffing, and duping other players. Though Poker requires betting or wagering, Rummy does not include stakes, and betting or wagering is not required to play the game.
Online
and offline gambling laws should be similar when it comes to card games because
it makes no difference either in online or offline mode when there is a monetary
transaction involved.
From
all the judgments, it can be understood that courts are of the opinion that
gambling that involves more fate than skills fall under the ambit of illegal
gaming. These judgments further show that any card game format that involves
compulsory stakes and no skill will be considered illegal.
But
from the case of Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monica Lakhanpal, we can
observe that when a game is already established to be a game of skill, playing
it with stakes is not illegal. The Court, in this case, made it clear that
playing games of skills offline and online are not similar when it comes to
monetary transactions. But since this case could not come to a judgment due to
withdrawal, it could not become a precedent.
Whether
such illegal gambling should be banned or not, there should be a more nuanced
opinion for the same as such gambling will happen either way, and illegal
gambling done underground creates black money. Except for Nagaland, no other state has rigid
laws on games of skill; otherwise, the industry self-regulates them. In a country
like India, where illiteracy attracts people to look for ways to earn easy
money, the government of India should have some legal framework in relation to
such gambling. Eg. The Rummy Federation has self-regulation codes for advertisements,
the way of playing, taxation etc. Most recent are various online games during
the lockdown that were promoted/advertised by saying that the game can be
played day and night on these platforms and can be used as an instrument to
solve social or financial problems. Therefore, the government needs to step in
to provide a basic legal framework for online gaming.
CONCLUSION
The laws for online and offline gambling should be similar when it comes to card games because it makes no difference either in the online mode or offline mode when there is a monetary transaction involved. From all the judgments, it is understood that courts are of the opinion that gambling that involves more fate than skill falls under the gambit of illegal gaming. As mentioned in the case of Dominance Games Pvt. Ltd. V. State of Gujarat that Rummy and Poker are different when it comes to betting. These judgments further show that the format of any card game that involves compulsory stakes and no skill will be considered illegal. But from the case of Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monica Lakhanpal, we can observe that when a game is already established to be a game of skill, playing it with stakes is not illegal. The Court, in this case, made it clear that playing games of skills offline and online are not similar when it comes to monetary transactions. But since this case could not come to a judgment due to withdrawal, it could not become a precedent. Although one cannot entirely agree with the Courts observation regarding the difference between online and offline card games in regards to the money involved. In my opinion, it makes no difference whether the stakes are online or offline, the laws should remain the same. As the world is becoming more digital, games now or later will become a part of the online arena. The internet is full of various discussions on whether such illegal gambling should be banned or not. My opinion is that there should be a more nuanced opinion for the same as such gambling will happen either way, and illegal gambling done underground creates black money. If there are laws on such gambling issue such as missing taxes, it can be handled more efficiently. Except for Nagaland, no other state has rigid laws on games of skill; otherwise, the industry self-regulates them. I do not suggest here that government should make laws on anything and everything, but in a country like India, where illiteracy attracts people to look for ways to earn easy money, the government of India should have some legal framework. Eg. The Rummy Federation has self-regulation codes for advertisements, the way of playing, taxation etc. Another most recent example was online ludo. Ludo is, in my opinion, fifty-fifty of fate and skill, as the number on the dice is based on fate and the rest is a skill. The game during the lockdown was promoted/advertised by saying that the game can be played day and night on these platforms and can be used as an instrument to solve social or financial problems. Therefore, the government needs to step in to provide a basic legal framework for online gaming.
*The Author has completed her BBA LLB (Hons.) in Intellectual Property Rights from Alliance University, Bengaluru.
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the Authors and not to the Jurisedge Academy.
Readers may submit his/her blog for publication.Click Here or Scan the QR Code
Saurabh Kumar
Share post:
Author: Yamini Gurjar*
Card games have been a controversial topic of discussion since Mahabharat and exist even today, legally or illegally. In today’s time, the risks of a game that involves some kind of consideration are taken more seriously than before simply because the law cannot allow money transactions based on fate. Moreover, when the internet is so easily accessible by anyone and everyone, laws regarding the same have to be strictly considered. In a country like India, illiteracy attracts people to look for ways to earn easy money laws regarding the same have to be in order and taken more seriously.
WHAT IS THE LEGAL ASPECT OF ONLINE GAMING?
Law recognizes two kinds of offline and online forms of gaming and gambling, i.e. the game of skill and game of chance. Games of skill are not included in the definition of gambling. The State Acts effectively leave it up to the individual states to determine what constitutes a game of skill. Every state has its legislation on gambling, and most states have an exception for games of skill, but these legislations are old; therefore, they do not clearly define or enumerate which games fall within this skill category. This further means that what is permitted in one state might be an offence in another. The Public Gambling Act of 1867 is the central law on the matter, and it has been adopted by several Indian states, including Uttar Pradesh, Punjab, and Madhya Pradesh. Other Indian states have adopted their laws to regulate gaming and gambling within their territories.
It should be noted that state legislatures have been adopted before the introduction of virtual or online gambling in India, and hence references to gaming/gambling in respective state legislatures are limited to physical premises only, except for Sikkim and Nagaland, which are the only states that have enacted legislation on online gaming. After reviewing the state gambling laws for online gambling in India, it was discovered that, except for Orissa and Assam, the majority of states have omitted ‘games of skill’ from the application of their respective gaming/gambling laws. Furthermore, under the laws of West Bengal, Nagaland, and Sikkim, playing such sports, such as ‘Poker,’ online and offline is allowed, subject to obtaining a licence from the relevant state authorities. However, this will only occur within the respective state’s geographical boundaries. Gambling is only legal in Goa if it is done in government-approved casinos.
COURT’S OPINION IN RELATION TO ONLINE CARD GAMES
In the case of State of AP v. K. Satyanarayana (1968)[i], the Supreme Court declared Rummy to be a “game of skill.” However, the Court stated that if the gaming house profits from the game of Rummy, it can be considered a crime under the laws of the state of Andhra Pradesh. SC also noted that the three-card game, which goes by numerous names such as flush, brag, and so on, is a pure chance game.[ii]
The Court in the case of Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monica Lakhanpal[iii], the Court held that if a game of skill is played with stakes, it does not amount to gambling and that playing games of skill for money are legal only in the physical form; online games cannot be compared to real games. Further, the Court also opined that using the prize money to attract business or allure gamers is illegal, and if online sites are taking a share of the winning hand, it is illegal because they simply become a virtual gambling house.
Before the case of Dominance Games Pvt. The Ltd. V. State of Gujarat[iv], the question of whether Poker is a “game of skill” or a “game of chance” was never thoroughly debated in any court in India. It was held that Poker is a ‘game of chance’ and therefore amounts to gambling under the Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887. The Court made the following observation that in the game of Poker, the players have no control or say over the cards they are dealt, and the final result is determined solely by fate or chance, depending on how the cards are dealt. To bet, putting on a poker face is a kind of bluffing or lying, and the so-called tactic is not a skill. The result is also determined by a player’s ability to expend money and how full his pockets are. The Court clarified that Rummy is not the same as Poker in that it is a game of deception, bluffing, and duping other players. Though Poker requires betting or wagering, Rummy does not include stakes, and betting or wagering is not required to play the game.
Online and offline gambling laws should be similar when it comes to card games because it makes no difference either in online or offline mode when there is a monetary transaction involved.
From all the judgments, it can be understood that courts are of the opinion that gambling that involves more fate than skills fall under the ambit of illegal gaming. These judgments further show that any card game format that involves compulsory stakes and no skill will be considered illegal.
But from the case of Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monica Lakhanpal, we can observe that when a game is already established to be a game of skill, playing it with stakes is not illegal. The Court, in this case, made it clear that playing games of skills offline and online are not similar when it comes to monetary transactions. But since this case could not come to a judgment due to withdrawal, it could not become a precedent.
Whether such illegal gambling should be banned or not, there should be a more nuanced opinion for the same as such gambling will happen either way, and illegal gambling done underground creates black money. Except for Nagaland, no other state has rigid laws on games of skill; otherwise, the industry self-regulates them. In a country like India, where illiteracy attracts people to look for ways to earn easy money, the government of India should have some legal framework in relation to such gambling. Eg. The Rummy Federation has self-regulation codes for advertisements, the way of playing, taxation etc. Most recent are various online games during the lockdown that were promoted/advertised by saying that the game can be played day and night on these platforms and can be used as an instrument to solve social or financial problems. Therefore, the government needs to step in to provide a basic legal framework for online gaming.
CONCLUSION
The laws for online and offline gambling should be similar when it comes to card games because it makes no difference either in the online mode or offline mode when there is a monetary transaction involved. From all the judgments, it is understood that courts are of the opinion that gambling that involves more fate than skill falls under the gambit of illegal gaming. As mentioned in the case of Dominance Games Pvt. Ltd. V. State of Gujarat that Rummy and Poker are different when it comes to betting. These judgments further show that the format of any card game that involves compulsory stakes and no skill will be considered illegal. But from the case of Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monica Lakhanpal, we can observe that when a game is already established to be a game of skill, playing it with stakes is not illegal. The Court, in this case, made it clear that playing games of skills offline and online are not similar when it comes to monetary transactions. But since this case could not come to a judgment due to withdrawal, it could not become a precedent. Although one cannot entirely agree with the Courts observation regarding the difference between online and offline card games in regards to the money involved. In my opinion, it makes no difference whether the stakes are online or offline, the laws should remain the same. As the world is becoming more digital, games now or later will become a part of the online arena. The internet is full of various discussions on whether such illegal gambling should be banned or not. My opinion is that there should be a more nuanced opinion for the same as such gambling will happen either way, and illegal gambling done underground creates black money. If there are laws on such gambling issue such as missing taxes, it can be handled more efficiently. Except for Nagaland, no other state has rigid laws on games of skill; otherwise, the industry self-regulates them. I do not suggest here that government should make laws on anything and everything, but in a country like India, where illiteracy attracts people to look for ways to earn easy money, the government of India should have some legal framework. Eg. The Rummy Federation has self-regulation codes for advertisements, the way of playing, taxation etc. Another most recent example was online ludo. Ludo is, in my opinion, fifty-fifty of fate and skill, as the number on the dice is based on fate and the rest is a skill. The game during the lockdown was promoted/advertised by saying that the game can be played day and night on these platforms and can be used as an instrument to solve social or financial problems. Therefore, the government needs to step in to provide a basic legal framework for online gaming.
*The Author has completed her BBA LLB (Hons.) in Intellectual Property Rights from Alliance University, Bengaluru.
Disclaimer: The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in the text belong solely to the Authors and not to the Jurisedge Academy.
Readers may submit his/her blog for publication. Click Here or Scan the QR Code
[i] 1968 AIR 825, 1968 SCR (2) 387
[ii] Law Commission Report No. 276, Legal Framework: Gambling And Sports Betting Including In Cricket In India, July 2018
[iii] Suit No 32 of 2012
Share this:
Related