The Madras High Court on February 26 issued notices to the State Government and the Union Government on a batch of petitions by online gaming companies challenging Tamil Nadu's KYC and time restrictions on real money games, with the notices returnable in two weeks. The bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice K Rajasekar refrained from passing any interim directions1.
The petitions, filed as WP 6784 of 2025, seek to declare Section 5(2) read with Section 14(1)(c) of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Online Gambling and Regulation of Online Games Act 2022, along with Regulation 4(iii) and Regulation 4(viii) of the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations 2025, as arbitrary, void, illegal and unconstitutional1. Section 5(2) gives the authority power to make regulations providing for time limits, monetary limits, age restrictions or other restrictions on playing online games, and Section 14(1)(c) states that no non-local online game provider shall allow the playing of any other online games contrary to the regulations1.
The two regulations under challenge require mandatory KYC for initial logging with AADHAAR, authenticated by a second-layer OTP sent to the phone number linked to the Aadhaar number, and impose blank hours for real money games from 12 midnight to 5 am Indian Standard Time, with no logging of the games permitted during those hours1.
- Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for one of the gaming companies, argued the rule was prohibitory and that Section 5 was invalid and inoperative in view of the central Information Technology Act and its rules, which already deal with timing, age and money matters. He argued that if every state imposed its own regulation it would destroy the companies' business, and pointed to the Tamil Nadu Shops and Establishments Act, under which the state allows gambling at clubs at any time of day, as discrimination between physical and online rummy1.
- Senior Advocate Sajan Poovayya submitted that courts in the country have held rummy is a game of skill and not a game of chance, so the state could not prohibit it, and that mandatory KYC would violate privacy and the Supreme Court's judgment in KS Puttaswamy1.
- Senior Advocate Raghavachari, for an association of players, argued that skill cannot be taken away between 12 midnight and 5 am and that the restriction would violate Article 211.
Advocate General PS Raman, supporting the blank hours, submitted they were imposed based on an expert report which said maximum addiction to these games among youths was during that time, and the particular time was fixed on that basis1. The court remarked:
"Prohibition is different from regulation. Merely because the game is not prohibited, you can't say it shouldn't be regulated. If anything is left unregulated, it won't be proper."
The case title is Play Games 24x7 Private Limited and Another v State of Tamil Nadu (batch cases)1.
What it means for players
The regulations remain in force for now. The court issued notices but passed no interim directions, so the KYC requirement and the 12 midnight to 5 am blank hour for real money games in Tamil Nadu are not suspended while the petitions proceed1. Players in the state who use real money gaming platforms face the same verification and timing rules as before the hearing. The outcome matters beyond Tamil Nadu because the petitions test whether a state can regulate online games that are not prohibited, and whether central IT rules occupy the field1. For the wider legal position across the region, see Gambling Laws in Asia: What Is Legal in 12 Jurisdictions and Can I Gamble in India?.
What happens next
The notices to the State Government and the Union Government are returnable by two weeks1. No date for further hearing or for a ruling on interim relief has been reported.
