E-Paper
Right to privacy not absolute, state has to prevent social harm: Madras HC
The Madras high court made the comments while dismissing petitions challenging the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025
The Madras high court on Tuesday said the fundamental right to privacy is not absolute and that the state has to prevent social harm, as it dismissed petitions challenging the Tamil Nadu Online Gaming Authority (Real Money Games) Regulations, 2025.
Online gaming companies challenged the regulations, mandating a “blank hour” midnight to 5am ban on gaming and an Aadhaar-based user verification system.
A bench of justices SM Subramaniam and K Rajasekar said the regulations amounted to “reasonable restrictions” that govern all fundamental rights. It added that a user’s fundamental right to privacy cannot be considered absolute and needs to be balanced with public interest. “When put on a scale, public interest overweighs the right to privacy,” the bench said as it read out the operative part of the judgment.
The ruling reinforces the state’s authority to regulate online gaming, particularly real money games, to prevent social harm and protect vulnerable users. It could set a precedent for other states grappling with the potential for addiction and negative social consequences associated with online gaming.
The ruling potentially empowers states to implement similar regulatory measures to safeguard health and well-being, even if it means limitations on the operational freedom of online gaming companies and users.
The court reserved its order on April 30, saying the state government can “step in” if online real-money games were addictive and caused social harm, provided the regulations balanced the fundamental rights of users and gaming companies.
Senior counsel Mukul Rohatgi and Sajjan Poovayya, representing gaming companies that offer online real-money games, opposed the regulations. They argued that the Union government already regulated such games. The lawyers said the Tamil Nadu government was trying to indirectly prohibit online gaming under the guise of protecting users from addiction.
Online gaming platforms, including Play Games 24x7, Head Digital Works, and Junglee Games India, particularly opposed provisions prohibiting users under 18 from playing real-money games, “know your customer” registration with Aadhaar for opening gaming accounts, and ban on playing during “blank hours”.
The gaming platforms challenged the rule mandating compulsory pop-up caution alerts, including those cautioning that online games are “addictive.”
The state government defended the regulations, citing alarming levels of addiction to online gaming. It said that users often included minors and that addiction was ruining their health.
