Introduction
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has dismissed the Karnataka government’s appeal challenging the Karnataka High Court order that quashed an FIR against DM Gaming Pvt Ltd, which was accused of running a gambling house under the guise of a poker club. The judgment, delivered by a Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Satish Chandra Sharma on September 29, 2025, puts an end to criminal proceedings against the company but leaves open the larger question—is poker a game of skill or a game of chance?
This case is crucial for India’s gaming and gambling industry, as it highlights the ongoing legal ambiguity surrounding poker and other card-based games.
Background of the Case
The controversy began when a complaint was filed on June 5, 2024, against Golden Ace Poker Room, operated by DM Gaming Pvt Ltd in Bengaluru. The Central Crime Branch (CCB) alleged that the establishment was running an illegal gambling house.
The police registered a case under:
- Section 79 of the Karnataka Police Act (keeping a common gaming house),
- Section 80 (being found in a gaming house), and
- Section 103 (seizure of instruments of gaming).
Following this, the CCB raided the premises, seizing ₹5.46 lakh in cash, poker chips, and playing cards. Several individuals, including the company’s director Mukesh V Chawla, were arrested.
DM Gaming then moved the Karnataka High Court, which ruled in its favour. The High Court quashed the FIR, holding that poker is a game of skill and therefore does not fall within the definition of “gambling” under the Karnataka Police Act. It further held that police interference in lawful skill-based play is impermissible.
Karnataka Government’s Challenge Before the Supreme Court
Unhappy with the High Court’s ruling, the State of Karnataka appealed to the Supreme Court of India.
The State argued:
- Poker is a game of chance: The government compared poker to games like Teen Patti, asserting that luck plays a dominant role and therefore poker should fall under the category of gambling.
- *Exploitation of youth: The State alleged that DM Gaming’s business model targeted *young men and students through inducements and promotional offers.
- *Illegal profits and extended hours: The government argued that the operations exceeded permissible timings and were structured to promote *excessive gambling, which could have social and financial consequences.
The government’s position reflected broader concerns about online gaming platforms, poker clubs, and the potential social harm of unregulated gambling.
Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the Karnataka government’s appeal and upheld the Karnataka High Court’s decision to quash the FIR against DM Gaming.
However, the Bench made an important clarification:
“We do not find any ground to interfere with the impugned order passed by the High Court. However, the question of law is left open.”
This means that while DM Gaming is free from criminal prosecution in this case, the Supreme Court did not conclusively decide whether poker is a game of skill or chance.
Thus, the broader legal issue remains unsettled, leaving room for future litigation and legislative intervention.
Legal Significance of the Ruling
The ruling is significant for several reasons:
- Reaffirmation of High Court’s authority: The Supreme Court respected the Karnataka High Court’s detailed ruling that poker involves significant elements of skill.
- Unsettled status of poker: By leaving the question of skill vs chance open, the Court avoided setting a nationwide precedent on poker’s legal status.
- Implications for the gaming industry: The decision provides temporary relief to poker operators but does not eliminate the risk of future prosecution, as states can still regulate or prohibit such games under their police powers.
- Scope of state control: The case illustrates the tension between businesses promoting skill-based gaming and state governments concerned about gambling and addiction.
Poker in Indian Jurisprudence: Skill vs Chance Debate
The debate on whether poker is a game of skill or chance has long been contested in Indian courts.
- Games of Skill: As per Supreme Court rulings in cases like State of Andhra Pradesh v. K. Satyanarayana (1968) and Dr. KR Lakshmanan v. State of Tamil Nadu (1996), games where skill predominates over chance are not considered gambling. Rummy and horse racing have been recognized as skill-based activities.
- Poker’s Position: Some High Courts, including Karnataka, have recognized poker as a game of skill. Others, however, treat it as gambling when played for stakes.
- Legal Uncertainty: Without a definitive Supreme Court ruling, poker remains in a grey zone, with its legality varying across states.
Broader Implications for Online and Offline Gaming
The ruling has wider consequences for the online gaming industry in India:
- Regulatory Vacuum: Since the Supreme Court did not decide poker’s legal nature, online poker platforms continue to operate in an uncertain legal environment.
- State Legislations: States like Tamil Nadu, Telangana, and Andhra Pradesh have banned online poker and rummy. Karnataka had attempted a ban too, but it was struck down by the High Court.
- Industry Growth vs Social Concerns: The online gaming industry in India is booming, with millions of users and significant investments. However, states remain wary of addiction, financial losses, and underage gaming.
- Need for Uniform Law: This case highlights the urgent need for central legislation to clearly distinguish between games of skill and chance.
Conclusion
The Supreme Court’s dismissal of Karnataka’s plea against DM Gaming provides short-term relief for poker operators but leaves the industry in legal uncertainty. By refusing to decide whether poker is a game of skill or chance, the Court has effectively pushed the matter to future benches or legislative reform.
For now, poker clubs and online platforms can continue operations in jurisdictions where they are not explicitly banned, but they remain vulnerable to state action and regulatory crackdowns.
The case underscores the need for clarity in gaming laws, especially at a time when the online gaming industry is rapidly expanding in India. Until the Supreme Court or Parliament conclusively settles the issue, poker will continue to sit on the fine line between lawful skill-based gaming and illegal gambling.
Also Read
Delhi High Court: Senior Citizens Can Cancel Gift Deeds If Maintenance Is Denied
Supreme Court upholds dismissal of judicial officer over false complaints against High Court judges
