From Sharab Bandi to Dabba Trading – Why Bans Rarely Work?
The cabinet’s move to ban online money gaming comes with good intent. Addiction and financial losses are real issues, and on paper, such a policy looks like a strong solution. But if we look at past experiences, bans rarely deliver the results they promise.
Take Bihar’s Sharab Bandi. Liquor was banned to curb alcoholism, yet the ground reality tells another story. People continue consuming alcohol, but now through illegal supply chains. Worse, many have died after consuming poisoned or poor-quality liquor—stories we keep reading in newspapers and watching on TV news channels. The intent was good, but the problem simply shifted underground, making it harder to track and far riskier for consumers.
A similar story plays out in India’s financial markets. Illegal dabba trading was banned, yet advertisements still openly lure traders with promises of “90x to 150x leverage.” Instead of disappearing, unregulated operators stepped in, creating more risk and zero accountability.
The same danger exists with online money gaming. Banning may create a sense of achievement on paper, but in reality, it risks pushing players toward offshore and unregulated platforms. This not only puts users at greater financial risk but also results in loss of tax revenue, employment, and FDI opportunities.
Regulation—not prohibition—is the real answer. Otherwise, the online gaming ban may simply repeat the tragic lessons of Bihar liquor ban where govt compromise with tax and many have died after consuming poisoned or poor-quality liquor.
Today stock prices of Nazara Technologies (