India’s sweeping crackdown on real-money online gaming has triggered fresh debate over whether stricter domestic rules are pushing users toward offshore gambling platforms that sit outside local oversight.
The issue has become more urgent since Parliament passed the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, which prohibits online money games, along with related advertising and payment services. The move was designed to protect consumers from financial harm and addiction risks, but it has also disrupted one of India’s fastest-growing digital sectors. Reuters reported that the Indian real-money gaming market had previously been projected to reach $3.6 billion by 2029.
Several major Indian gaming companies responded by suspending real-money features. Dream11, PokerBaazi and Mobile Premier League were among the high-profile platforms affected after the law was passed, according to Reuters. Flutter Entertainment also shut down money-based gaming operations in India through its Junglee subsidiary, which employed more than 1,100 people. Flutter said the Indian operation had previously been expected to generate around $200 million in revenue and $50 million in adjusted EBITDA in 2025.
The government’s position is that online money games create financial and psychological risks for users. Critics of the ban, however, argue that demand for real-money play does not simply disappear when legal domestic platforms are restricted. Instead, some users may turn to offshore gambling sites, mirror domains, VPNs and payment channels that are harder for Indian authorities to monitor.
That concern is already visible in enforcement data. MediaNama reported that India had blocked or actioned 8,000+ URLs linked to online betting and gambling by March 28, 2026, citing a Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology response in the Lok Sabha. More than 4,800 of those actions reportedly came after the 2025 Online Gaming Act.
Industry research has also pointed to a possible migration of users. Exchange4Media, citing Lumikai’s State of India Interactive Media Report 2025, reported that nearly one in three Indian real-money gaming users may have migrated to offshore betting platforms after the crackdown. BestMediaInfo quoted Lumikai principal Aditya Deshpande as saying that the RMG ban “didn’t eliminate demand,” adding that research with VTION showed one in three former players moving to offshore betting platforms and spending up to ₹10,000 per month with no oversight, tax contribution or consumer protection.
The policy question is now larger than India alone. Online gambling rules differ widely across Asia, with some jurisdictions allowing licensed casino and betting activity, others banning it outright, and many struggling to police offshore operators. For readers trying to understand the wider regional picture, this guide to online casinos across Asia explains how casino laws, offshore access, payment methods and player risks vary between Asian markets.
Consumer protection remains the central issue. Licensed domestic platforms are generally easier to tax, regulate and hold accountable. Offshore gambling sites, by contrast, may operate from jurisdictions with different licensing standards, limited local accountability and fewer practical remedies for Indian users in the event of disputes over withdrawals, blocked accounts or bonus terms.
The challenge for Indian policymakers is that enforcement alone may not be enough. Blocking thousands of URLs can limit access to specific domains, but offshore operators can return through mirror sites, private communities, affiliate channels and new payment routes. MediaNama also reported in April 2026 that MeitY had warned VPN providers and intermediaries over access to blocked betting and prediction market platforms, underlining how enforcement is now spreading beyond gambling sites themselves.
India’s crackdown has clearly reshaped the legal real-money gaming market. The next test is whether it can also reduce offshore gambling activity, or whether tighter domestic restrictions end up driving more users toward platforms that are harder to regulate, tax or control.
