Introduction
A legal grey zone, lotteries in India have generally occupied an anomalous role, but are strictly regulated in being accepted as gambling, and selectively tolerated by the State. This compromise can be seen in the Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998, which permits the state-authorised lotteries only, but not individual participation. The massive expansion of online real-money gaming platforms and the online lottery structures has, however, necessitated the creation of the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, dubbed as PROG Act.
I. Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998: A Short Legal Overview
The 1998 Act came into force by using the power of Entry 40, List I (Union List), where the Parliament had the power to have control over lotteries without any interference with the operation of the States.
Key Features:
Only the Governments of States have the right to arrange, hold, or license lotteries.
- The private lotteries are not allowed.
- A state can prohibit lotteries, including lotteries organised by other States.
- Most of the enforcement is focused on physical and territorial activities and not digital platforms.
Although legal in, among others, Goa, Sikkim, Nagaland, Kerala, and some of the North-Eastern States, lotteries are nonetheless adjudged as a form of gambling, and not as a licensed trade.
This description was confirmed by the Supreme Court in the Lottery Taxation decision of 2022, which concluded that lotteries constituted actionable claims, but were still considered gambling, subject to tax only by States under Entry 62, List II (State List).
II. The Digital Revolution: The Digitisation of Lottery
The legal certainty of the 1998 Act is lost when the lottery goes online, and especially when:
- Tickets are sold digitally, and draws or advertisements are done online.
- Players play on either a State or a national basis.
The Act did not envision the internet-based distribution, which left a gap in regulation that was utilised by non-state online lottery websites, including foreign ones that can be reached in India. It is this vacuum that the PROG Act, 2025, comes into.
III. The PROG Act, 2025: A Paradigm Shift on the Regulation of Gambling
The PROG Act is a defining feature of a centralised, technology-enhanced regulatory strategy, meant to check the unregulated real-money gaming marketplace in the online environment.
Section 2(1)(g): meaning of Online Money Game
This has been stipulated to make an online money game any game in which users bet money with a prospect of monetary reward, whether the game is played on the basis of a skill game, a chance game, or a skill-chance amalgamation.
Section 5: Prohibition of online money games and online money gaming services
It serves as the main enforcement rule, making criminal an action that:
- Offering,
- Aiding, or
- Abetting online money games.
This provision essentially criminalises online lotteries run privately, although similar online lotteries may be legal under State law.
Section 8: Establishment of an Authority
The Central Government can create or designate an Authority to register online games and find, by inquiry, whether a game is a prohibited "online money game" or not. This body is mandated to give binding directions, handle grievances on behalf of the users, and control the online gaming environment in order to ensure its adherence to the stipulations of the Act.
Section 18: Not in Derogation, Overriding
Section 18 elucidates that although the PROG Act works alongside the existing laws, but in case of a conflict, this section shall prevail over the others.
Penal Consequences: Section 9
The provision of banned online money games draws:
- Imprisonment up to 3 years or with a fine, and
- Fines which may extend up to ₹1 crore or both.
This clause can substantially increase the compliance level of the online lottery operators.
IV. Skill vs Chance: The Doctrinal Contention
In the course of decades, the Indian courts have maintained the principle of preponderance of skill, which differentiated between gambling and skilful lawful business.
Landmark Judgments:
State of Bombay v. R.M.D Chamarbaugwala (1957)
This case paved the way because it defined competitions in terms of using mostly skill or chance. It was established that competitions that require much skill are not gambling.
State of Andhra Pradesh Vs K. Satyanarayana (1968)
A case in point of a major legal interpretation, which the Supreme Court has made in this case, is the distinction made between games of skill and games of chance as far as gambling laws are concerned. Realising that rummy, a popular card game, is a game of significant proficiency, the Court not only acquitted the accused but also gave precedence to other games that demand the same expertise to seek a like legal defence in court.
K.R. Lakshmanan v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996)
It is a major advancement in Indian gambling law and reflects a fine distinction between games of skill and those of chance. The Court not only saved an economically important sport with horse racing, but also affirmed the constitutional requirement against legislation that is arbitrary.
V. Indian Contracts Act, 1872: Agreements by Way of Wager
In section 30, there is the cancellation of wagering agreements, which are not criminal.
However, Lotteries are cut off and regulated statutorily by the 1998 Act. Online lotteries of the private or foreign organisation are not supported by statutes and can be legally attributed as a subject of the legal vulnerability of participation. Lottery contracts have always been unenforceable by the courts unless they are secured by statute.
VI. International Online Lotteries: Illegality across the Borders
There are other issues concerning participation in international online lotteries:
- Violations of FEMA,
- Exposure to cybercrime laws,
- Lack of consumer protection.
Indian officials have confirmed that engaging in foreign online lotteries can be subject to the criminal effects of this practice, particularly in the broad prohibitions and restrictions (under the PROG Act).
VII. Conclusion
Although the 1998 Act permits lotteries as an exception to the general ban on gambling, the PROG Act places online lotteries under much stricter scrutiny, whether they were legal offline or not.
The PROG Act breaks the decades-old skill/chance dichotomy of online money games, thus leaving the constitutional jurisprudence of skill-based gaming as a legitimate trade under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. This way, it not only gets under the skin of settled judicial doctrine, but it also asks about the issue of legislative competence, federal balance, and proportionality in a way even more grave.
Finally, the future legality of online lotteries, as well as the online gaming industry in general, depends on whether or not the Supreme Court will rule in favour of the constitutionality of the PROG Act. The decision of the Court will play a central role in establishing whether the regulatory future of gambling in India will be characterised by subtle and state-controlled regulation of the gambling activities or centrally enforced prohibition. Regardless of the route taken, the case will continue to be one of the milestones in Indian gambling and digital economy legal history.
Share:
Share on
×