India's Supreme Court Throws Out Junglee Games' Bid to Reopen State Ban Ruling

India's Supreme Court has dismissed, without a hearing, ten review petitions led by Flutter's Junglee Games against its May judgment upholding Tamil Nadu and Karnataka's bans on online games played for stakes. Operators now face upheld prohibitions in both states whatever happens to their challenge to the national ban.

• Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan dismissed ten review petitions led by Junglee Games India on 15 October, finding "no merit" in them
• The petitions sought to reopen the court's 27 May 2026 judgment, which held that states may prohibit betting on games of skill, including rummy and poker, and upheld laws in Tamil Nadu and Karnataka
• Real-money gaming has been banned nationally since the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 took effect on 1 May, and India's gaming authority had registered no games by September
• Flutter, which owns 95% of Junglee, booked a $556 million impairment after the national ban and says Junglee now runs only as a free-to-play platform
• A constitutional challenge to the national Act, led by Head Digital Works, is still pending before a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Surya Kant

The Supreme Court Closes the Ordinary Review Route on Skill-Game Betting

The Supreme Court of India dismissed the review petitions by circulation, in chambers rather than in open court, according to the court's record of proceedings and signed order of 15 October 2026. The lead petition, R.P.(C) No. 10491/2026, was filed by Junglee Games India Private Limited against the State of Tamil Nadu. The bench condoned the delay in filing, rejected the applications for an oral hearing and gave a single sentence of reasoning: "We find no merit in the Review Petitions and the same are, accordingly, dismissed." The copy on the court file carries a digital signature dated 26 October.

The ten petitions span all three batches of appeals decided in May. They challenged the judgment of 27 May 2026 in State of Tamil Nadu v. Junglee Games India (2026 INSC 594), in which the same two judges allowed appeals by Tamil Nadu and Karnataka and set aside rulings of the Madras High Court of 3 August 2021 and 9 November 2023 and of the Karnataka High Court of 14 February 2022. The order names only Junglee among the petitioners; G2G News reports that Head Digital Works, Play Games24x7 and the Federation of Indian Fantasy Sports also sought review.

The May judgment held that while games of skill may fall outside "gambling", betting on them remains within a state's power over "betting and gambling" under Entry 34 of the State List. "When the element of betting and gambling enters the picture, the nature of the game ceases to be of relevance," the bench wrote. It found that such betting is res extra commercium, so no fundamental right to carry it on can be claimed unless a legislature creates an exception. It declared Tamil Nadu's 2021 amendment, parts of its 2022 online gambling law, including the schedule listing rummy and poker, and Karnataka's 2021 amendment valid.

A State Ruling Beneath a National Ban

Parliament passed the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act on 21 August 2025, it received presidential assent the next day, and it came into force on 1 May 2026, according to the Supreme Court Observer. Challenges filed in three High Courts were transferred to the Supreme Court in September 2025, and AGBrief reported that a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant agreed in August to take the batch to final hearing. G2G News reports that the bench is next due to sit on 17 December.

Flutter says in its fourth-quarter 2025 results that it has ceased all real-money gaming in India, that Junglee "now operates only as a free-to-play platform", and that it recorded a $556 million non-cash impairment, including $517 million of goodwill, against the $237 million it paid for its 95% stake. It guided that the exit would cost $250 million of revenue in 2026 and $310 million in 2027. Junglee's website now states: "All our games have been discontinued." NEXT.io reports that Flutter laid off 350 staff in India. No public response from Flutter or the other petitioners to the dismissal had been reported at the time of writing.

Operators Now Need to Win Twice

The dismissal does not change what Junglee can offer today, because the national Act already bars it. What it changes is the value of a future win. If the three-judge bench were to strike down the central Act, Tamil Nadu and Karnataka would still hold prohibitions that the Supreme Court has now upheld and declined to revisit, and the May reasoning would be available to any other state minded to legislate. G2G News suggests the larger bench could take a different view, but its task is the central Act's validity, not the division bench's reading of Entry 34. For investors pricing an Indian reopening, the realistic scenario is no longer a single national switch but a market reassembled state by state.

The Curative Route Is Open in Name Only

MediaNama reports that a curative petition is now the only judicial remedy left against the May judgment, and such petitions succeed only on narrow grounds, such as a breach of natural justice. The refusal of oral hearings and the one-line order give little to build on. The argument that skill games differ from chance now has to be won in the challenge to the central Act, which rests on Articles 14 and 19(1)(g).

Flutter's Live Exposure Is Tax, Not the Ban

Tax, not the ban, is where Flutter's remaining money sits. Flutter's 10-Q for the second quarter of 2026 records a $62 million provision for Junglee and PokerStars India and says it expects any final demand to be significantly lower than the ₹198.5 billion, approximately $2.1 billion, previously disclosed. Indian authorities have since cut GST demands on Dream11, Gameskraft and Games24x7 by about 75%. With Junglee's goodwill already written down, the dismissal is unlikely to bring a new charge, but it confirms the footing on which those tax claims rest.

The review route is closed and the May judgment now stands as settled law for the states. Any route back for Indian real-money gaming runs through the challenge to the national Act, and even a win there would leave the states free to keep their own bans.