Betting on Fame: Vijay Deverakonda, Prakash Raj, and India’s Online Betting Probe

For India’s film world, promotional posts are routine. But when endorsements overlap with illegal online betting, routine turns into a criminal probe. Two prominent actors — Vijay Deverakonda and Prakash Raj — have now been questioned by Telangana’s Crime Investigation Department (CID) in an investigation that is still unfolding.

[Image]

---

Key Facts

Detail	Information
Subjects	Vijay Deverakonda; Prakash Raj
Type of Matter	Alleged promotion/endorsement of online betting apps; potential violations under the Telangana Gaming Act and IT Act; possible FEMA/tax angles under review
Period	2024–2025 (with earlier activity cited in 2016 for one app)
Triggering Events	Actors appearing before the Telangana CID/SIT for questioning in November 2025
Current Outcome	Ongoing investigation; no charges filed as of publication
Jurisdiction	Telangana, India (Hyderabad/Cyberabad); multi-state enforcement actions referenced

Introduction

India’s booming online gaming market has spawned a shadow economy of betting outfits masquerading as “fantasy” or “skill” platforms. In Telangana, state authorities formed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to examine celebrity endorsements, financial flows, and the role of ad agencies in promoting platforms alleged to be illegal betting operations. In November 2025, actors Vijay Deverakonda and Prakash Raj appeared before investigators in Hyderabad to answer questions about past promotions, payments, and the companies behind them.

---

The Allegations

Investigators are exploring whether celebrity endorsements helped funnel Indian users toward betting services that operate in legal gray zones or outright contravention of state and central rules. Lines of inquiry include:

• the contracts governing promotional content,
• the remuneration paid for endorsements and how it moved, and
• what due diligence (if any) was done on the platforms’ legality.

Both actors have cooperated with investigators. Statements in the public domain indicate that one line of defense is the distinction between gaming and betting — a critical legal fault line in India — and whether an endorsed app later morphed into something the celebrity did not intend to promote.

---

Inside the Investigation

According to reports, the SIT/CID has been consolidating cases registered across Telangana and coordinating with other state units. Recent rounds of questioning focused on financial trails (contracts, bank statements, commissions), the timeline of endorsements, and the role of intermediaries such as influencer agencies and offshore marketing fronts. Earlier arrests of alleged organizers in multiple states are part of the same larger crackdown.

---

What OSINT Shows

Open-source checks on several named platforms and their marketing shells suggest:

• Corporate footprints that link to licensing or hosting in foreign jurisdictions known for online-betting operations.
• Coordinated ad campaigns across Instagram/YouTube with near-identical copy and disclosure patterns.
• Agency fingerprints — recurring contact emails and UTM patterns — indicating centralized buys routed through a handful of digital shops.

These OSINT indicators don’t prove criminality by endorsers; they illustrate how the promotion ecosystem is structured and why investigators are following the money and the contracts.

---

Industry & Public Response

The case has prompted renewed calls for clearer ad-disclosure rules around finance-adjacent apps, plus tougher due diligence by agencies representing celebrities. Public reaction has split between those who see endorsements as commercial speech and those who argue celebrity influence imposes a higher duty of care when products can cause harm — especially to youth.

---

Status & Outlook

As of mid-November 2025:

• Both actors have appeared and cooperated; no charges have been filed.
• The SIT/CID continues to review financials and contracts and to question additional promoters and agencies.
• Further actions may hinge on whether authorities establish illicit flows or regulatory breaches, and on how courts interpret the gaming vs. betting distinction for specific platforms.

What to watch next: additional summonses; ED/FEMA angles (if any) tied to ad payments; and any test-case litigation clarifying celebrity liability for digital-app promotions.