Combating Gambling in the Digital Age: An Analysis of the Gambling Prevention Act 2026

01. Introduction

Gambling is one of the oldest forms of criminal activity. It persists across the world, including in Bangladesh. The rapid development of information and communication technologies fundamentally altered gambling operations. The widespread use of mobile phones and internet connections eliminated territorial barriers, enabling online gambling at any time from any location.

For a long time, Bangladesh relied on the Public Gambling Act 1867 (PGA 1867) to regulate the offence. Over time, this century-old legal instrument, originally designed for offline gambling, lost its force and became obsolete. It proved ineffective in addressing technology-based modern forms of gambling. The absence of a comprehensive and contemporary legal regime challenged law enforcement agencies in preventing and prosecuting online gambling effectively.^[1]

In response to these challenges, the government enacted the Gambling Prevention Act 2026 (GPA 2026). It took effect throughout Bangladesh on 1 July 2026. This article audits the GPA 2026, pointing out embedded statutory strengths and operational weaknesses. This study adopts a legal doctrinal analysis and a library-based approach based on secondary data, analysing relevant laws, regulations, legal principles, and academic writings.

02. The Hidden Costs of Online Gambling

No state agency holds precise information on how many people in Bangladesh are involved in this crime or the total amount of money transferred abroad. Rough estimates suggest around 5 million individuals engage in online gambling in Bangladesh.^[2] Approximately USD 450 million is believed to be transferred and laundered through cyber-based platforms, exerting severe pressure on the struggling economy.^[3] Online gambling transactions are often sent overseas through informal channels like hundi or cryptocurrency. These illegal activities undermine the rule of law and hinder the state’s ability to investigate cross-border financial crimes.

03. How Technology Facilitates Online Gambling

The widespread availability of internet access and smartphones drives the increase in online gambling in Bangladesh.^[4] Bangladesh Telecommunication Regulatory Commission (BTRC) statistics revealed that as of May 2026, Bangladesh had approximately 134.07 million internet subscribers. This includes 119.12 million mobile internet users and 14.95 million ISP and PSTN users.^[5]

The fast growth of Mobile Financial Services (MFS) has made deposits and withdrawals faster, making online gambling platforms highly accessible and convenient.^[6] As part of the move to build a cashless society, Bangladesh Bank (BB) encourages banks to handle transactions through digital and mobile applications.^[7] The increasing popularity of digital financial services makes it possible for individuals to gamble online without physically visiting a venue.

04. Rationale for the Gambling Prevention Act 2026

The old law, PGA 1867, criminalised only three offences: keeping a common gaming house, gambling on such premises, and repeat offences. It provided for relatively minor penalties. These included a fine of up to Tk 200 or a maximum of three months imprisonment for keeping a common gaming house,^[8] a fine of up to Tk 100 or a maximum of one month imprisonment for staying in a common gaming house,^[9] and increased penalties of up to one year imprisonment or a fine of up to Tk 600 for repeat offenders.^[10] In the Dhaka Metropolitan Area, gambling in public places is prohibited and punishable by a fine of up to Tk 100.^[11]

In the digital age, these sanctions did not deter gambling activities. These laws failed to anticipate or regulate online gambling, mobile applications, or digital platforms, which today constitute the main channels for gambling. The PGA 1867 and DMPO 1976 were out of date and inadequate to deal with the extent and sophistication of modern gambling. Thereafter, section 20 of the Cyber Protection Act 2026 (CPA 2026) prescribed punishment for online gambling, functioning merely as a penal provision in a larger cyber law framework. Later, the government repealed section 20 of the CPA 2026 and enacted the GPA 2026 to create a dedicated legal framework for the regulation and prevention of gambling.

05. Key Features of the Gambling Prevention Act 2026

5.1 Deterrent in Nature

All offences under the GPA 2026 are cognizable, non-bailable, and non-compoundable.^[12] This indicates the legislature’s intention to treat gambling as a serious offence requiring stringent legal intervention.

5.2 Updated Definitions of Offences

Section 2 of the GPA 2026 defines gambling-related terms.^[13] These include online betting, money laundering, cryptocurrency transactions, spot-fixing, biometric fraud, and other information and communication technology tools used in gambling operations. This provides a deep statutory understanding of the offences.

5.3 Classification of Gambling Offences

The GPA 2026 broadly classifies gambling into two categories: conventional (offline) gambling and online gambling. This recognises the distinct nature, methods, and regulatory challenges associated with each form of gambling.^[14]

5.4 Corporate and Platform Liability

Where a company, corporate body, or digital platform is directly involved in gambling, the responsible officers of such entities shall also be liable to criminal prosecution.^[15]

5.5 Enhanced Punishment for Repeat Offenders

The GPA 2026 provides for up to double the prescribed punishment for repeat offenders.^[16] The Act also establishes a sentencing policy where any person who aids, abets, facilitates, or conspires in the commission of a gambling offence shall be liable to the same punishment as the primary offender.^[17]

5.6 Separate Forums for Trial

Conventional gambling offences remain triable by Magistrates’ Courts under regular criminal procedures, while online gambling falls under the jurisdiction of the Cyber Tribunal.^[18] Section 25 classifies the transfer, concealment, or conversion of gambling proceeds through financial institutions, hundi, hawala, cryptocurrencies, or digital assets as a predicate offence under the Money Laundering Prevention Act 2012, which a Special Judge will adjudicate. Jurisdiction is determined by the nature and mode of commission of the offence under the Gambling Prevention Act 2026.

5.7 Overriding Provision and Procedural Framework

The GPA 2026 has an overriding effect over other laws in the event of any inconsistency.^[19] Nevertheless, where the GPA 2026 is silent on a procedural issue, the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 will apply.^[20]

06. Offences and Penalties under the Gambling Prevention Act 2026

The GPA 2026 provides for different terms of imprisonment, large financial penalties, or both, depending on the nature and severity of the offence. Sections 17, 20, 21, and 23 of the GPA 2026 provide the harshest punishments, ranging from a maximum of seven years imprisonment or a fine of up to Tk 5 crore or both.

07. Filing of Cases, Investigation, and Trial

Proceedings under the GPA 2026 can only be initiated by specified public officials: those empowered by the DC and UNO, or police officers not below the sub-inspector rank. Courts cannot entertain complaints of offences lodged by unauthorised persons.^[33] The investigating officer is empowered to search, seize evidence, arrest suspects, and confiscate technological instruments used in gambling.^[34] With prior judicial approval, authorities can freeze or suspend bank accounts, mobile financial service accounts, digital wallets, and cryptocurrency wallets linked to gambling activities.^[35] After being listed in the schedule, offences under the GPA 2026 may also be dealt with through mobile courts.^[36]

08. Preventive Mechanisms under the Gambling Prevention Act 2026

The GPA 2026 permits judges and appropriate authorities to order the closure of gaming establishments.^[37] Websites, apps, servers, IP addresses, domain names, and social media platforms linked with gambling activities may be blocked, sealed, stopped, or seized by authorities.^[38] The law allows artificial intelligence-based monitoring systems to detect and prevent gambling operations.^[39] Suspected individuals and digital entities may be included in a national digital blacklist database.^[40]

The government may introduce integrated systems connecting the National Identity (NID) database and mobile financial services to strengthen monitoring and enforcement.^[41] The government can form a task force comprising different agencies to combat gambling effectively.^[42] The GPA 2026 distributes responsibilities among different state agencies.^[43] It recognizes the international nature of online gambling and provides for bilateral and multilateral cooperation with foreign governments for investigation, prosecution, extradition, and enforcement.^[44] The government can publish statistics, annual reports, and research to inform the public,^[45] and initiate public awareness programmes to educate citizens about injurious effects.^[46]

09. Areas of Concern in the Gambling Prevention Act 2026

The GPA 2026 is a strong step to fight technology-based gambling, but it is not a complete regulatory framework. Substantive and procedural loopholes are embedded within the text that may undermine effectiveness and clog implementation.

9.1 Judicial Limitation on Initiating Proceedings

Section 30 of the GPA 2026 designates only two categories of public officials to file a case. This limits the possibility for victims and concerned parties to bring allegations to the courts. Enforcement depends largely on the initiative and discretion of authorised officials. This can result in delays, arbitrariness, nonenforcement, and limited access to justice.

9.2 Absence of Extraterritorial Jurisdiction

The GPA 2026 is silent on offences committed by persons or entities from abroad. The lack of an extraterritorial jurisdiction clause is a lacuna that impedes the prosecution of cross-border offenders.^[47] Absent such a provision, the Act’s efficacy in fighting online gambling remains limited.

9.3 Multiplicity of Trial Forums

The GPA 2026 provides for multiple trial forums, including Magistrates’ Courts, Cyber Tribunals, Special Judge Courts, and Mobile Courts. The involvement of multiple forums results in overlapping jurisdictions, procedural inconsistencies, and uncertainty regarding the appropriate venue for adjudication.

9.4 Broad Content-Blocking Powers

The provision for blocking, removing, or banning under section 38 provides wide discretionary powers with insufficient safeguards against abuse. The Act makes no room for an aggrieved person to challenge the actions. The lack of independent oversight or an appeals mechanism raises severe due process concerns.

9.5 Concerns Regarding the Blacklist Database

The blacklist provision under section 40 raises due process and reputational harm concerns. The Act does not specify criteria for inclusion in the database, the length of time information can be retained, or the process for review and removal. This results in people or entities being listed without sufficient notice or meaningful opportunity to challenge their listing.

9.6 Concerns in the NID–SIM–MFS Linking System

Under section 41, the NID–SIM–MFS linking system raises significant concerns regarding privacy and data protection. Bangladesh has witnessed breaches of NID and birth and death registration databases.^[48] A centralized system is highly vulnerable to unauthorized access, data leaks, identity theft, and financial loss. Without sufficient legal and technical safeguards, the system infringes on the rights of data subjects.

9.7 AI-Based Surveillance and Privacy Concerns

Section 44 authorizes the government to implement AI-based surveillance systems to identify and counteract gambling. In Bangladesh, instances of leaked personal information raise questions about the state’s capacity to maintain the confidentiality and security of surveillance data. In addition, using artificial intelligence can cause algorithmic mistakes, bias, or random results.

9.8 Absence of Rehabilitation and Probation Mechanisms

Gambling offenders are mostly young people who fall into the practice due to social factors like unemployment, peer influence, and depression.^[49] Many can reform and return to normal civic life. The GPA 2026 makes no provision for probation or correctional measures to enable rehabilitation and social reintegration.

9.9 Absence of Victim Protection Mechanisms

The GPA 2026 is strictly prohibitory and punitive. It does not provide special protections for games of skill,^[50] whistleblowers, or online gamers who may be victims of gambling-related fraud. The Act fails to provide clear mechanisms for the protection or compensation of victims who suffer financial or reputational harm.

10. Towards a More Comprehensive Regulatory Framework

Based on the findings, the following reforms are needed to make the GPA 2026 consistent with the principles of due process, privacy protection, proportionality, and rehabilitative justice.

1. Withdrawal of Restrictions on Initiating Criminal Proceedings: Relax section 30 to increase filing capacity. Allow victims or interested parties to file complaints before the appropriate court, subject to safeguards against frivolous litigation.
2. Introduce Extraterritorial Jurisdiction: The GPA 2026 must include an explicit extraterritorial jurisdiction provision to enable the prosecution of offenders operating from abroad.
3. Avoiding Jurisdictional Conflict and Procedural Uncertainty: Designate a single forum to hear gambling-related offences or establish clear jurisdictional boundaries.
4. Establish Judicial Oversight for Content-Blocking Measures: Ensure due process by inserting procedural safeguards, including prior judicial authorisation and a right of appeal for aggrieved individuals.
5. Strengthen Safeguards for the Blacklist Database: Mandate notice to the individuals concerned, establish an appeal mechanism, and enforce reasonable data retention periods.
6. Incorporate Robust Data Protection Standards: The NID–SIM–MFS Linking System must operate with legal and technical shields including data minimization, encryption, access control, and independent security audits.
7. Surveillance Through a Human Rights Framework: AI-based surveillance must be transparent, requiring accuracy testing and independent oversight. AI should function solely as a decision-support tool under human supervision.
8. Introduce Rehabilitation and Probation Mechanisms: Adopt a correctional approach for young or first-time offenders, integrating provisions on probation and counselling.
9. Inclusion of Victim Protection and Redress Mechanisms: Provide concrete provisions for victim compensation, protect whistleblowers, and clearly recognise games of skill to distinguish them from gambling.

11. Conclusion

Bangladesh enacted the GPA 2026 to curb traditional and online gambling. The Act provides a broad framework for prevention and suppression. However, its provisions raise serious concerns regarding privacy, due process, judicial oversight, and accountability. To address these issues, the state needs clearer legal standards, stronger data protection, independent oversight mechanisms, and accessible means for appeal. Detailed rules can address most of these statutory shortcomings.^[51] Making the Act functional requires sophisticated technological adoption, trained investigators, and close co-operation among state machineries. To uphold the constitutional mandate against gambling,^[52] the state must deploy a multi-faceted strategy involving social intervention, legal enforcement, and public education.

⚡ 2nd Cohort: Registration Live

2026 Legal Research Professional Certificate

Lifetime Membership Verified Certification Legal Research Training Publication Opportunities Official References for Jobs

Secure Your Place Today →