Gujarat High Court Dismisses PIL Against Mobile Games Alleged To Be Games Of Chance, In View Of Similar Pending Plea In Bombay HC

Observing that an identical PIL is pending before the Bombay High Court raising the same issue, the Gujarat High Court on Friday (January 3) dismissed a plea seeking a restrain on the operation on certain mobile game platforms on the ground that the games in question constitute games of chance and not games of skill.

In doing so the court granted the petitioner–Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati, liberty to approach the Bombay High Court in an intervention plea in the pending matter and raise the issue there.

After hearing the matter for some time, a division bench of Chief Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Pranav Trivedi while dictating the order said, “Having gone through the matter, pertinent is to be noted that a Public Interest Litigation No. 10 of 2024 impleading the same respondents as that of respondent No. 3 and 4 herein has already been filed before the High Court of Bombay, raising the same issue as being raised in the present petition with respect to the mobile games created by respondent 3 and 4 being games of chance and not the games of skill. The prayer made in the Writ petition is to restrain the respondent no. 3 to 4 from continuing with the impugned betting platform. The High Court of Bombay has issued notice on 28.03.2024 in the aforesaid Public Interest Litigation raising the issue as has been raised here. In our considered opinion, when one High Court is dealing with the issue which concerns pan India, it would not be proper to entertain the present PIL filed for the same cause of action.The present PIL is thus dismissed giving liberty to the petitioner to approach Bombay High Court by filing an intervenor application to raise the issues which are being additionally raised here.”

During the hearing the counsel for the petitioner relied on the recommended amendment in The Gujarat Prevention of Gambling Act, 1887 by the Chairman of Gujarat State Law Commission (Former Judge, Supreme Court of India, Justice M.B. Shah) stating that the introduces strict punishments and blocking the websites (for betting).

To this submission, the bench orally said, “That is only proposed amendment. You cannot rely on a proposed amendment. It is not a law as on date, it is only a recommendation.” The bench additionally asked the Counsel for the petitioner to approach the Bombay High Court and questioned the reason for filing different petition in different High Courts for the same cause of action and same issue and getting different Orders.

The Counsel answering the query of the Court submitted “Because the prayer over there is for the State of Bombay or India which might be decided at the end of the petition.”

The court then orally asked the counsel to withdraw it and wait after Bombay High Court decides. It further orally asked the Counsel for the Union of India whether there is an order by the Apex Court stating “this is a game of skill” regarding the PIL (Punjab & Haryana High Court) and if there is a review pending before the Bombay High Court.

The Government Pleader (GP) appearing for the state at this stage said,“review is pending which is possibly why this matter is not proceeded with. Here also, the entire argument revolves around whether this is a game of chance or skill...The petitioner doesn't implead the intermediaries that hosts these platforms but impleads as private respondents 3 and 4 to private parties that runs their platforms". The counsel then read the document pertaining to terms and conditions for the usage of the games of one of the two private respondents. The terms as per the petition states:

“The mobile games hosted on the platform are all games of skill...each game will reward certain skills such as knowledge of the game, familiarity experience, reflexes experience, hand-eye coordination etc. Certain game may have pre-determined outcomes such as Sudoku, Crosswords, Brick-brakers which are available by the users using their skill to play the game. Users must note, all mobile games available on the platforms are games where the success and/or performance of the users depends predominantly upon superior knowledge, training, attention, experience and adroitness games of skill on playing the game. Games of skill under Indian Law are excluded from the ambit of Gambling legislations such as the Public Gambling Act of 1867 and other State enactments except in the restricted States.

MPL doesn't support, endorse or offer any users games of chance for money. Each mobile game and contest available on the platform are clearly defined (by) rules and code of conduct. All users are encouraged to read, understand and follow these rules to be successful in the games. MPL shall not be liable if users do not adhere to the game rules or otherwise engage in gambling or betting activities on the platform.”

The GP then stated that the counsel for the petitioner is relying on the terms and condition of one agency, to contend that they are offering 'Games of Chance' whereas the terms of use reflect that that they are not per se Games of Chance but they are 'Games of Skill', and further submitted that the view taken by the Bombay High Court is in consideration at the stage of review. 

The Counsel then submitted that the terms and condition read by the state's counsel are contravening to the real game.

The Division Bench then asked the Government Pleader if the matters decided by the Bombay High Court where it was held that it is a game of skill and not game of chance, if it is with reference to the games mentioned in the present PIL.

The GP then clarified that it is with reference to the pattern of games and then relied on the Law Commission of India's report wherein certain tests were laid down. Referring to the report the GP said, “a) Gambling and betting of game of chance or skill: The main test to determine whether the game amounts to gambling or not is what dominates, preponderates, whether skill or chance, games of chance are those where the winner are predominantly determined by luck and result of the game is entirely uncertain and a person is unable to influence such results by his mental or physical skills. The person indulging in such games wins or losses by sheer luck or skills and has no role to play. On the other hand, the result of a game of a skill is influenced by the expertise, knowledge and training of a player”. 

The Counsel for the Petitioner then relied on the screenshots wherein the questions which were asked in the game no where pertained to applying any scientific knowledge. These questions included, 1) India to win T20 Championship in 2024? 7 Rupees if yes, 3 Rupees for No 2) Modi to become PM again in 2024? 7 Rupees if yes, 3 Rupees if No. 3) Stree – 2 movies to become a Hit?. The Counsel then emphasized that it is a sheer chance, there is no skill involved whether a movie will become a hit.

The Division Bench then orally said, “No, there is a strategy involved in this.” The GP then contended that whether the movie will become a hit or not depends of the star cast, who is the director. 

"Whether a cricket game will be won, there are too many factor's involved," the petitioner's counsel said. 

At this stage the court orally said, “These are the days of social media, these are the days (where) collective, lot of information is available to the person. So, these are not those days where we used to read the newspaper, watch DD News only and we were aware of what is happening in the world by these two medium only. So, there are lot of mediums, many people are (who) are having an interest in a particular field, they keep a track of the events which are going on. So, they can apply their skill, they can apply their information, they can apply the statistics out of their information which they have to play the game.”

The petitioner's counsel then pointed out that the games are open to any public and any age group and the platform is open to entire public. He said that a child of 16 years or an adult of 18 years also can play this game who might not have knowledge and pointed out that these games are addictive.

The court then orally said “The child is not going to gamble. They play for the fun and parents have to take care of it.” Regarding the contention on games being addictive, the court orally said that it is a different issue.

It further orally said, “What you are trying to say is that there cannot be any such kind of game, where people apply the skill and then they get something out of it. Then, all these issues are pending before the Bombay High Court, let the Bombay High Court decide. Why do you burden our Court? Two Courts deciding the same issue”.

Case Title: Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati vs Union of India