Begin typing your search...

    TN govt doesn't have legislative competency to ban online rummy: ASG

    The online gaming companies moved the Madras High Court (MHC) challenging the law enacted by the Tamil Nadu government to ban online rummy and poker in the State through the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Games Act, 2022.

    TN govt doesnt have legislative competency to ban online rummy: ASG
    X

    Representative Image 

    CHENNAI: The Union government informed the Madras High Court that the State government doesn't have the legislative competency to enact a law to prohibit online rummy.

    The online gaming companies moved the Madras High Court (MHC) challenging the law enacted by the Tamil Nadu government to ban online rummy and poker in the State through the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Games Act, 2022.

    While the case was heard by Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu, on Wednesday, Senior counsels Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Manishankar, and Satish Parasaran appeared before the court in favour of gaming companies.

    The senior counsels wondered if rummy can be played through offline, and how cannot it played through online, the state failed to provide information about how playing rummy in online and offline differs. They further advanced that online rummy cannot be considered as less than any other games, it is also a game of skills. The senior counsel objected that the law enacted by the State says that through the online rummy, many youngsters are addicted, especially in south India. They argued that there is no empirical data provided about the addiction to online rummy. It is argued that the gaming companies set up a self-regulatory system to avoid addiction to the game and no minor can access the rummy, we don't allow them to play, the argument added.

    Justice Chandru's report says that there was no skill involved in any of the online games, and they invariably made the players increasingly addicted and, eventually, indebted to the company but the senior counsels differed and argued that the report doesn't allow the gaming companies to represent their side, which is injustice, the gaming side contended.

    The Additional Solicitor General ARL Sundaresan appeared for the Union government contended that the State government doesn't have the legislative competency to enact such, it falls under the Union government. He also argued that the Union government has already enacted a law to regulate online games to control betting.

    Advocate General R Shunmugasundaram appeared for the state requested further time for the counter submission as to accommodate Senior Counsel Kapil Sibal who was engaged in this matter.

    After the submission, the bench posted the matter to August 1, 2023, for further arguments.

    DTNEXT Bureau
    Next Story