13 Feb 2026
In this update:
– releases draft Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Rules, 2025
– releases India’s AI Governance Guidelines, 2025
Partner: Jyotsna Jayaram, Senior Associate: Prabal De, Associate: Divya Govindan
On 2 October 2025, the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology (MeitY) released the Draft Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Rules, 2025 (Draft Rules), to operationalise the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025 (PROGA), enacted on 22 August 2025.
While PROGA aims to prohibit online money games, the Draft Rules focus on fostering the growth of legitimate e-sports and online social games while strictly prohibiting “online money games”. “Online money games” are defined as any game involving a user paying stakes with the expectation of monetary winnings, irrespective of whether the game is based on skill or chance. The cornerstone of the Draft Rules is the establishment of the Online Gaming Authority of India (OGAI), a statutory body with powers equivalent to a Civil Court. The OGAI is empowered to: determine if a game qualifies as a prohibited money game; register permissible games; maintain a national registry; inquire into user complaints; issue directions; and impose penalties for non-compliance, including suspension or cancellation of a game’s registration.
The Draft Rules establish registration requirements for e-sports and online social games and a grievance redressal mechanism to be followed by all registered games.
The Draft Rules can be accessed here.
India’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) Governance Guidelines, released in November 2025 by the MeitY under the IndiaAI Mission, establish a “light-touch,” innovation-first regulatory philosophy that avoids a new, standalone AI law. The framework is designed to be adaptive and relies on leveraging and amending existing statutes to manage AI-related risks.
The guidelines are built on a “whole-of-government” approach (i.e., coordinated AI governance across all government ministries and regulators) and are structured around four key parts: (i) foundational principles, dubbed the “Seven Sutras”; (ii) key recommendations across six pillars; (iii) a phased action plan; and (iv) practical guidance for industry stakeholders.
The framework emphasises voluntary commitments, industry self-regulation, and techno-legal solutions like content watermarking and privacy-preserving technologies to build a “safe, trusted, and inclusive” AI ecosystem. A three-tier institutional architecture is proposed, comprising an AI Governance Group, a Technology & Policy Expert Committee, and an AI Safety Institute to provide strategic oversight, technical expertise, and safety validation.
It will be important for entities to stay informed about emerging AI-related industry codes, techno-legal measures or other safeguards that may be introduced by the government and regulators.
The AI Governance Guidelines can be found here.
In Rhutikumari v Zanmai Labs Pvt. Ltd.,1 a single judge of the Madras High Court held that cryptocurrency qualifies as “property” under Indian law. The court observed that, although cryptocurrencies are neither tangible property nor legal tender, they possess the defining characteristics of property, as they can be owned, enjoyed, transferred and possessed in a beneficial form. Accordingly, the Court expressly stated that cryptocurrencies are capable of being held in trust and are subject to ordinary property law protections.
The case arose from an application under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, seeking interim protection after the applicant’s holdings of 3,532.30 XRP tokens on the WazirX platform were frozen following a cyber-attack. In reaching its conclusion, the Court relied on principles established in Internet & Mobile Assn. of India v RBI,2 and Zanmai Labs (P) Ltd. v Bitcipher Labs LLP3 to hold that virtual digital assets, including cryptocurrencies, qualify as “property” under Indian law – a view supported by their tax treatment as virtual digital assets under Section 2(47A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
The Court granted interim protection, directing the exchange to furnish a bank guarantee or escrow deposit equivalent to the value of the applicant’s frozen cryptocurrency holdings until the arbitration concludes.
A copy of the judgment can be accessed here.
[1] Rhutikumari v Zanmai Labs Pvt. Ltd., (O.A. No. 194 of 2025)
[2] Internet and Mobile Association of India v Reserve Bank of India (MANU/SC/0264/2020)
[3] Zanmai Labs Pvt. Ltd. v Bitcipher Labs LLP, Comm. Arb. Pet. (L) No.11646 of 2025, dated 07.10.2025
If you require any further information about the material contained in this newsletter, please get in touch with your Trilegal relationship partner or send an email to alerts@trilegal.com. The contents of this newsletter are intended for informational purposes only and are not in the nature of a legal opinion. Readers are encouraged to seek legal counsel prior to acting upon any of the information provided herein.
Technology and Data Protection Quarterly Milestones (October-December 2025)
13 Feb 2026Telecommunications Quarterly Milestones (October-December 2025)
13 Feb 2026Gaming, Cryptocurrency, and Artificial Intelligence Quarterly Milestones (October-December 2025)
13 Feb 2026If you would like to receive content directly in your inbox from our knowledge repository, please complete this subscription form. This service is reserved for clients and eligible contacts.
Under the rules of the Bar Council of India, Trilegal is prohibited from soliciting work or advertising in any form or manner. By accessing this website, www.trilegal.com, you acknowledge that:
We prioritize your privacy. Before proceeding, we encourage you to read our privacy policy, which outlines the below, and terms of use to understand how we handle your data:
For more information, please read our terms of use and our privacy policy.
