The Haryana government’s Prevention of Public Gambling Bill, 2025, passed during the budget session in the state’s Vidhan Sabha, has cast doubts on the operations of opinion trading platforms in India. These platforms are also currently under scrutiny in the Gujarat High Court. Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) formally urged the Indian government to ban opinion trading apps and websites referring it as ‘Digital Satta’.
Haryana Chief Minister Nayab Singh Saini, who also holds the Home portfolio, introduced the Haryana Prevention of Public Gambling Bill, 2025, which aims to prevent and penalize individuals involved in public gambling, operating common gambling houses, betting on sports or elections, and engaging in match-fixing or spot-fixing in sports.
According to the provisions of the Act, “whoever indulges in match-fixing or spot-fixing in sports shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not less than three years and up to five years, and shall also be liable to a fine of not less than Rs 5 lakh.” A subsequent offense could result in imprisonment for up to seven years.
The Act defines a “bet” as “any agreement, whether oral, written, or otherwise, between two or more parties regarding the occurrence or non-occurrence of an event—past, present, or future—whose outcome is unknown to any or all of the parties at the time of the agreement, where the party making an incorrect prediction must pay or forfeit a stipulated consideration to the other party or parties involved, either monetary or non-monetary.”
Interestingly, this definition of “bet” closely mirrors the format used by many opinion and sports trading platforms operating in India. However, under Section 1(3) of the Act, “It shall come into force on such date as the State Government may, by notification in the Official Gazette.” It remains unclear when the state government will enforce the Act, which could effectively ban opinion trading platforms in Haryana.
Congress MLA Aditya Surjewala criticized the Act, calling it “deeply flawed” and arguing that it lacks clarity on the definition of betting. He also pointed out that gaming instruments such as boards, cards, and dice are not adequately defined, and demanded that the Act be referred to a Select Committee for further review, citing similar laws enacted in other states.
Experts argue that the lack of clear regulations for opinion-based gaming creates a gray area that both players and platforms continue to exploit. While opinion-based games appeal to a wide audience and generate substantial revenue, their similarity to wagering and gambling poses challenges for the broader real-money gaming (RMG) industry. It is critical for the government, especially the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY), to establish comprehensive guidelines to address these concerns.
Additionally, the Supreme Court of India recently reinstated a petitioner’s case seeking a ban on opinion trading apps. The Supreme Court bench strongly criticized the Gujarat High Court for dismissing the Public Interest Litigation (PIL) merely because a similar case was pending in the Bombay High Court, without adequately considering the merits of the matter.
In Sumit Kapurbhai Prajapati v. Union of India & Others, a special leave petition challenging the Gujarat High Court’s refusal to hear the PIL was taken up by a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan. The Court ultimately granted leave and reinstated the petitioner’s case in the Gujarat High Court, preserving all rights and contentions of the parties involved.
Previously, the Confederation of All India Traders (CAIT) formally urged the Indian government to ban opinion trading apps and websites. In a letter addressed to Ashwini Vaishnaw, Minister of Electronics and Information Technology, and Piyush Goyal, Minister of Commerce and Industry, CAIT emphasized the serious risks posed by these platforms, describing them as a form of “digital satta” (online gambling).
CAIT also raised grave concerns about the potential impact of these platforms on India’s democratic processes. The letter warned that prediction-based opinion trading platforms allow users to bet on election outcomes, thereby posing a threat to electoral democracy. Given the widespread reach of these platforms, CAIT cautioned that they could influence public opinion and undermine the integrity of democratic institutions.