top of page
Search

ONLINE BETTING IN INDIA


AUTHOR-Diksha Mehta


“At the gambling table, there are no fathers and sons”

– Chinese proverb


Online betting in India has become rampant and uncontrolled. Gambling has been prevalent in Indian society from the ancient times. In India betting is considered as a wager. The Indian contact act, 1872 deals with wagering agreements. Apart from it, public gambling act, 1867 prevents gambling in public arenas.


Online betting laws are still unclear in India and are being developed. There have been surge of number of users participating in online betting’s especially during IPL, FIFA etc. there are various website that encourage users to bet online and they evade the law under the disguise of skill and knowledge which forms exception under Indian contact act, 1872.


Section 30 of Indian contract act, 1872 talks about wager agreements. In India, wager agreements are void ab intio. In the case of Subhash Kumar Manwani v. State of Madhya Pradesh[1] the Honorable court identified some reasons why gambling contacts are void ab-intio. The court said that spending time on useless activity where no skill, brain etc is required will hamper the overall development of an individual and law prohibit such acts.


But there are two exceptions under section 30 which are as follows: -

  • Horse racing- if a party gambles or bet for an amount more than 500 rupees it will not be considered as a void agreement.

  • Puzzle/crossword competition - If a competition requires one’s intellectual capacity, adroitness etc then it will not fall under the ambit of wager agreements.

As the subject of online betting falls under the state list, so state has the jurisdiction to make laws regarding the same. In order to understand online betting, we need to deliberate upon the mechanism and framework agreed by centre and different states to regulate it.


Sikkim is the only state to allow betting online by giving permission to golden gaming private international to run its operations in the state in 2016. Apart from it, Sikkim On-line Gaming (Regulations) Rules, 2009 have been made in this regard which differentiate certain legal games that can be played online but with certain regulations and conditions. States like Nagaland, Telangana have passed amendments to gambling laws in order to incorporate changes in law with changed scenarios.


Other states like Maharashtra, Karnataka have expressly banned any type of betting. While other states have recognised some activities as legal and other states have till now taken no stand on this issue and is still juggling with different opinions.


Moreover, these laws are existent from the colonial times and due to changing needs of the society, we need new laws in order to control illegal activities. Since online betting is becoming ubiquitous now a days due to digitalisation but we lack the legal framework to address the concerns associated with it. Moreover, we have almost negligible cases on online betting.


In the case of Delhi District Court: Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. v. Monica Lakhanpal[2], the court enumerated on the issues of online betting/gambling by giving few guidelines. But after the final submissions the petition was withdrawn. Therefore, there are no judgments on online betting in India as such.


In the 276th report of the Law commission there is recommendation for legalizing betting in India. Also keeping in view, the surreptitious nature of the act, there are many wrongful acts committed under the garb of online betting. Since, we know the source of money is unlawful it should to finance various terror operations, anti-national activities etc. one batch of policy makers argue to legalize gambling so that we can at least trace the source of money and it can also benefit the state exchequer. State government have to frame respective measures in order to regulate online betting.


Since there is a lot of ambiguity regarding the online betting laws in India, it is on the whims of the respective state government to decide whether to legalize online betting or not considering all the pros and cons of the situation.

[1] Subhash Kumar Manwani v. State of Madhya Pradesh, A.I.R. 2000 M.P. 109 (India). [2] Delhi District Court: Gaussian Network Pvt. Ltd. v. Monica Lakhanpal, Suit No. 32/12 (Delhi District Court).

19 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page