High Court upholds "Dream 11" as game of skill, not gambling, under the law.

The High Court dismissed the PIL petition challenging the legality of the online game "Dream 11" as gambling and betting. Relying on judgments from other High Courts and the Supreme Court, the High Court affirmed that "Dream 11" involves skill, not chance, and falls within the exemption for games of skill under the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance. The Court emphasized that success in the game depends on users' skill and knowledge, not luck, and concluded that the issue had been extensively examined and settled by higher courts. The petition was dismissed, and no coercive action against the game organizers was warranted.

---

---

Issues:
1. Public Interest Litigation (PIL) petition challenging the legality of the online game "Dream 11" as gambling and betting.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a resident of Ajmer City involved in coaching, filed a PIL alleging that the online game "Dream 11" constitutes gambling and betting, deceiving the public. The petitioner sought orders to stop the game and initiate criminal proceedings against the organizers. Respondents argued that the game involves skill, not chance, citing judgments from Punjab and Haryana High Court and Bombay High Court, which upheld the legality of "Dream 11." They contended that the game falls under the exemption for games of skill as per the Rajasthan Public Gambling Ordinance, 1949.

The High Court reviewed the judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court and Bombay High Court, which both found "Dream 11" to be a game of skill, not gambling. The High Court emphasized that success in the game depends on users' skill, knowledge, and judgment, rather than chance. It noted that the Supreme Court had upheld the decisions of the High Courts, dismissing Special Leave Petitions challenging the legality of the game. The High Court concluded that the issue of whether "Dream 11" involves gambling or betting had been extensively examined and settled by the higher courts, finding no merit in the PIL petition. The Court dismissed the petition, emphasizing that no coercive action was warranted against the game organizers.

In light of the consistent legal precedents and the Supreme Court's dismissal of challenges to the judgments, the High Court found no grounds to interfere with the rulings that established "Dream 11" as a game of skill, not falling under the purview of gambling or betting laws. The Court reiterated that the game's outcome is determined by skill and knowledge, not chance, and upheld the legality of the game. The dismissal of the PIL petition underscored the settled nature of the issue regarding the classification of "Dream 11" as a game of skill, thereby rejecting the petitioner's claims.

---