Plea in Delhi HC challenges constitutionality of IT rules with regard to online gaming

The petitioner, represented by advocates Akshat Gupta and Sakshi Tikmany, submitted that the rules which were notified on April 6 go beyond the legislative competence of the Centre as the Constitution “clearly and categorically” gives the power to “state legislatures to enact laws on the subject of gambling and betting”.

The petitioner pointed out that the rules seek to “create a framework for regulating online gaming, including online real money games by classifying them as ‘intermediaries’ under the IT Act, 2000 and imposing several due diligence requirements and compliances such as Know Your Customer (KYC) verification, appointment of grievance redressal and nodal officers, taking registration and membership of Self Regulatory Body (SRB), and tasks these SRBs with certifying certain categories of online real money games as permissible online games etc”.

The plea further stated that the IT Act does not grant power to the Centre to frame rules to regulate online gaming. “In fact, online gaming has not even been mentioned anywhere under the IT Act and neither has an online gaming service provider been classified as an ‘intermediary’ by the parent legislation,” the plea added.

The plea further stated that the rules neither conform to the Constitutional provisions nor are effective to control online gaming activities which are growing in an “untrammeled manner at an explosive pace”, adding the the exercise of power by the Centre to notify the rules “which are ex-facie ultra vires the Constitution and the IT Act is against public interest”.