Q.A wagering agreement, under Section 30 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, is:
(A) Illegal and punishable under the Act
(B) Void, but not illegal — its collateral transactions generally remain valid and enforceable
(C) Voidable at the option of the loser
(D) A fully valid and enforceable contract

Section 30 makes a wager void, which is a lighter consequence than making it illegal.

Section 30 declares agreements by way of wager void. This is a deliberately lighter consequence than illegality — since the wager is only void (not illegal), a genuinely separate, collateral transaction connected to it (e.g. money simply lent to a friend, later used by them to place a bet) is not itself tainted and remains recoverable, unlike a transaction connected to a truly illegal agreement.

Option-by-option analysis:

• (A) Incorrect — the Act makes wagers void, not illegal; no punishment attaches to entering one.
• (B) Correct — void but not illegal, which is exactly why collateral transactions survive. …