The Enforcement Directorate (ED) has filed a prosecution complaint against real-money gaming platform WinZO and its promoters, alleging that users were duped out of approximately ₹734 crore through bot-driven and algorithm-manipulated gameplay on the company’s mobile app.

The prosecution complaint was lodged on 23 January 2026 before a special Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) court in Bengaluru, naming Winzo Pvt Ltd, its directors Paavan Nanda and Saumya Singh Rathore, as well as several wholly-owned subsidiaries in India, the United States and Singapore as accused.

According to the ED, an examination of game code, internal communications and developer agreements revealed that bots and simulated player profiles were embedded in games without user consent, creating unfair losses and undermining the platform’s integrity.

The agency alleges that the company generated proceeds of crime totalling about ₹3,522 crore, including alleged laundering through shell companies overseas, and that assets worth hundreds of crores have been seized during the investigation.

These developments come amid a sweeping government ban on real-money gaming under the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, and have intensified calls for stronger oversight of digital gaming platforms.

Allegations of Manipulation, Bot Use and Financial Harm

According to the ED’s prosecution complaint, the WinZO mobile app offered more than 100 games and claimed a user base of around 25 crore, especially in Tier-III and Tier-IV cities. The company charged users a portion of betting amounts as a commission and repeatedly assured customers that its platform was secure, transparent, and free of bots claims the ED now contests.

The agency’s probe found that, until December 2023, several games were embedded with bots, artificial intelligence and algorithm-driven player profiles. Subsequently, from May 2024 to August 2025, the company allegedly shifted to simulating historical match-play data of dormant or inactive player accounts again without users’ knowledge or consent and pitted these synthetic profiles against real players. This was said to create the illusion of genuine competitive play while in fact systematically skewing outcomes.

To disguise these manipulative practices, internal labels such as EP (Engagement Play), PPP (Past Performance of Player) and Persona were used to refer to bots and synthetic profiles, the agency claims. Initial gameplay sessions reportedly allowed users to win smaller amounts against weaker bots, fostering trust.

However, once players upped their stakes, stronger bots were deployed, leading to consistent losses and financial drain. Over time, total losses to real users attributed to these bot-driven matches were estimated at about ₹734 crore.

The ED also alleges that WinZO failed to return legitimate user winnings and deposits worth ₹47.66 crore, even after the Union government’s ban on real-money gaming took effect in August 2025. Moreover, it claims that restrictive withdrawal mechanisms were used to block legitimate higher-stake winnings, effectively forcing users into continued play and further losses.

Asset Seizures, Foreign Links and Legal Entanglements

The ED’s case highlights extensive investigative action over nearly a year. Search and seizure operations at WinZO’s offices and the homes of its executives in November and December 2025 yielded documents, electronic records and movable assets including bank balances, payment gateway funds, mutual funds, bonds, fixed deposits and even cryptocurrency holdings altogether valued at around ₹690 crore.

In parallel, authorities have frozen substantial deposits held by the company and its subsidiaries. Earlier actions included freezing about ₹192 crore in fixed deposits and mutual funds related to ZO Games (formerly Zo Games Pvt Ltd), a subsidiary that has now petitioned the Karnataka High Court to defreeze a portion of those funds to meet operational costs.

The ED contends that portions of alleged illicit proceeds were laundered abroad through shell companies in the United States and Singapore, including an overseas entity holding an estimated $55 million (approximately ₹489.9 crore), which investigators assert functions as a shell without actual operations.

Legal entanglements have also included the arrest of WinZO’s founders; while Saumya Singh Rathore has secured bail, co-founder Paavan Nanda remains in custody and the company’s operations have been reportedly crippled, leaving many users unable to access funds stuck in their accounts.

Regulatory Shift and Industry Impact

The chargesheet against WinZO comes within the broader context of India’s crackdown on real-money gaming. In August 2025, the Parliament passed the Promotion and Regulation of Online Gaming Act, 2025, which comprehensively bans real-money gaming and empowers authorities to regulate permissible formats like esports and purely social games.

Since the ban’s implementation, enforcement has intensified, with authorities blocking websites, freezing assets and conducting raids not only on WinZO but also on other industry players, such as Gameskraft and Dream11, raising concerns among operators about a wider regulatory squeeze.

Police across multiple states including Karnataka, Rajasthan, Delhi and Gurugram had earlier filed FIRs alleging cheating and manipulation, providing part of the basis for the ED’s financial probe.

The unfolding case has sparked debate about the balance between consumer protection and innovation in digital entertainment. While some users on social media platforms have shared positive personal experiences with the app before the crackdown, others have reported suspicions of bots and biased game mechanics, reflecting mixed public perceptions in the run-up to regulatory action.

The Logical Indian’s Perspective

The ED’s chargesheet against WinZO underscores deep concerns around transparency, fairness and the protection of financially vulnerable users in the digital economy. Technology and innovation should enrich lives and expand opportunities, but when opaque algorithms and undisclosed automation are used in ways that undermine trust and lead to substantial financial harm, decisive action is justified.

This case highlights not just alleged corporate malfeasance but wider sectoral risks associated with real-money gaming, particularly for economically marginalised individuals who may be lured by the promise of easy earnings. It also emphasises the importance of effective regulation and robust consumer rights frameworks in an increasingly interconnected digital landscape.