Crisis Management for a Conflict with North Korea
This is the best North Korea conflict crisis support available today. Predict, plan, build, prepare, train, and test in the right way.
Right to trade of online gaming platforms can’t be at the cost of human lives, government tells Supreme Court
The Hindu | English | News | Nov. 28, 2025 | Regulation
The Indian government informed the Supreme Court that online money gaming platforms cannot claim a right to trade or profession when such activities result in loss of human lives. The government argued that money generated through these platforms is often laundered or used to fund terrorism, and the rapid spread of online money games contributes to addiction and fatalities, especially among young people. This justification accompanies the push for the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act aimed at curbing these risks. Online gaming companies requested the court to stay the law, but the government highlighted that an estimated 45 crore people have suffered losses exceeding ₹2,000 crore due to online money games.
The government cited multiple "systemic legal violations" linked to online money gaming, including large-scale tax evasion, money laundering, cross-border illicit fund flows, and potential terror financing. Banks have identified “money mule accounts” connected to these platforms, and the rise in online money gaming since COVID-19 has coincided with a spike in fraud cases involving gaming, gambling, and illegal loan applications. The affidavit also noted risks linked to identity theft, data compromise, and exposure to cyber threats from interactions with unknown players on these platforms.
Data presented by the government showed a significant increase in outward remittances related to online money gaming, exceeding ₹5,700 crore during 2023-2024. The affidavit included reports of deaths linked to online money games across states such as Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Telangana, Andhra Pradesh, and a recent case from Indore in 2025 involving a 13-year-old student. The government defended the Act’s differentiation between real money games—which are hazardous—and e-sports, supporting this classification as a rational and constitutional measure aimed at protecting youth, public health, and preventing terror funding and money laundering.