India Supreme Court declines to hear online rummy petition

TAGs: India, rummy, Telangana

india-supreme-court-rummy-telanganaIndia’s online rummy operators were dealt a blow on Friday after the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of state laws prohibiting playing the game for stakes.

On Friday, Indian wire services reported that a full bench of the Supreme Court in New Delhi had dismissed a writ petition filed in May by rummy operator Krida Sports and Games Pvt Ltd that sought to limit police interference in rummy games played for stakes.

The Chennai-based Krida Sports and Games filed its writ in response to the Telangana state government amending its Gaming Act 1974 to include a new definition of “cyber space” and removing the exemption for betting or wagering on games of skill. Telangana’s move was quickly followed by the state governments in Tamil Nadu and Andhra Pradesh.

The company, which had sought to launch rummy clubs in the three states, claimed its fundamental rights were being infringed by the amended laws. India’s rummy and poker operators never truly know where they stand with legal authorities, with some rummy events going off without a hitch, while others are disrupted by hordes of police expressing shock – shock! – that such activities are going on under their noses.

The Telangana government rejected the company’s claims, citing legal precedents that barred private companies from claiming such fundamental rights. The government also claimed that any rummy played for stakes was a “social menace” that caused “an adverse impact on family life,” while claiming that the online game was subject to manipulation by the operators.

Although the Supreme Court declined to consider the company’s petition, the Court previously declared that its decision would have no effect on online rummy companies’ petitions in the High Courts in Telangana and Andhra Pradesh. reported that these state-level petitions could come up for hearings as early as next week.


views and opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of