Bombay HC to consider if Ludo is a game of chance or skill – Times of India

MUMBAI: Is Ludo a game of chance or skill? This is a question the Bombay high court will consider. On June 3, the vacation bench issued notice to the state government on an application filed by a Mumbai politician seeking an FIR under the Prevention of Gambling Act against a company that operates online Ludo with money at stake. The players stand a chance of winning real “prize money” on the app, the HC was informed.
Senior counsel Raja Thakare, appearing for a leader of Maharashtra Navnirman Sena (MNS), said the challenge was to a February 2, 2021, order passed by a metropolitan magistrate at the Girgaon court rejecting his private complaint and refusing to direct police to register a first information report (FIR) under the anti-gambling law or cheating under the Indian Penal Code.
The plea is for HC to declare Ludo a game of chance and not skill and it would attract provisions of Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act as it is played for stakes.
The magistrate held Ludo is not a “game of chance” but “a game of skill” and that it requires skill to win the game.
The bench of Justices S S Shinde and Abhay Ahuja asked Thakare why the sessions court was not approached first via an application for revision of the magistrate’s order.
Thakare said the issue involved is larger, involving a substantial question of law on what the game constitutes, which only the HC could go into. He submitted the magistrate’s order was “erroneous as Ludo is a game of chance and not a game of skill and the provisions of Maharashtra Prevention of Gambling Act shall apply if the game is played for stakes.”
The bench then issued notice, adjourned the matter to June 22 for a hearing, and said the state may file its reply by then.
The application said his complaint against the company (not made a party before the HC) was filed on November 3, 2020, before Girgaon police station, after he saw children playing online Ludo with money at stake.
The plea before the HC stated that the app is allowed in two modes: ‘Online’ with unknown opponents on permission of a ‘host’ who is also on the app or ‘with friends’ who are known people via the app. There is an entry fee to join a ‘table’ in the ‘online mode’ and a portion of the fee is remitted to the game app.
The claim before the HC is though it appears no player has control over what the dice rolls out, “the app and algorithm used by it” having a possible control over the roll of the dice “cannot be disregarded’’ and needs investigation. The applicant, MNS member K R Muley’s contention is playing Ludo for stakes amounts to betting or gambling and providing any place for such a game of Ludo would attract Section 4 of the Gambling Act as an offence of opening a “common gaming house for profit”.
In 1996, the SC had said horse racing was a “game of skill” and does not fall within the ambit of the gambling prevention Act.