Fantasy sports as games of skill: Dream 11 treated as outside gambling law and petition rejected on merits.

Fantasy sports such as Dream 11 were treated as games of skill because user knowledge, judgment, attention and strategy were held to predominate, and the presence of chance did not by itself convert the activity into gambling or betting. The reasoning also noted that game-of-skill activity falls outside the mischief of the gambling law regime referred to in the record, including the skill-based exemption under the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949. Relying on earlier decisions and the settled position reflected in connected proceedings, the controversy was treated as no longer open for reconsideration, and the petition was rejected on merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the online fantasy game "Dream 11" amounted to gambling or betting, or was a game of skill exempt from interference, and whether the public interest petition deserved any relief.

Analysis: The issue was assessed in the light of earlier decisions holding that fantasy sports such as Dream 11 depend on users' skill, judgment, knowledge, and attention, and that a game does not become gambling merely because an element of chance is present if skill predominates. The reasoning also noted that game-of-skill activities are outside the mischief of the gambling law regime referred to in the record, including the exemption for mere skill under the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949, and that the subject had already been treated as settled by prior High Court decisions and the dismissal of the connected special leave petitions. The Court therefore treated the controversy as no longer open for reconsideration.

Conclusion: Dream 11 was held not to be gambling or betting and to be a game of skill; the petition was rejected on merits.

---