Part I — The Three Amendments
1. Semantic Reframing: "Penalties" → "Punishments"
The heading of Chapter XX has been changed from "Penalties" to "Punishments." This is not merely cosmetic. "Penalties" connotes administrative or civil consequences — fines and compliance orders that can be mitigated. "Punishments" invokes a formal criminal framework, signalling that patent violations carry moral culpability. The legislature's intent: strengthen deterrence and align patent enforcement with the language of criminal responsibility. Courts may give this framing weight in sentencing considerations.
2. Section 118 — New Discretionary Safeguard for Section 39 Violations
Section 39 of the Patents Act requires Indian residents to obtain permission from the Central Government before filing an invention abroad. This provision protects innovations relevant to defence and atomic energy. Previously, any violation automatically attracted criminal punishment under Section 118.
The Amendment adds a proviso: "Contravention of Section 39 shall not attract punishment under Section 118 if the Central Government opines that the invention was not relevant to defence or atomic energy at the time of contravention."
Implications: Inadvertent violations — a researcher filing abroad without realising the requirement — no longer automatically result in criminal liability if the invention is non-sensitive. Inventors facing potential prosecution can petition the government to certify non-sensitivity. The Section 39 obligation itself is not repealed — only the punitive consequence is conditionally mitigated.
Cautionary note: For sensitive sectors (defence, atomic energy), heightened caution remains essential. Maintain documentation of an invention's intended use and commercial applications. Consider proactively seeking government certification for any past inadvertent filings in non-sensitive domains.
3. Section 119 Omitted — Register Falsification No Longer a Patent Offence
Section 119 previously criminalized falsification of entries in the patent register — up to 2 years imprisonment. The entire section has been omitted.
Prosecution does not disappear — it shifts to the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023: Section 191 (false evidence), Section 318 (cheating), Section 226 (forgery), Section 227 (using forged documents). The omission reflects a legislative preference to eliminate overlapping offences rather than decriminalize conduct.
Practical consequence: Fewer patent-specific criminal prosecutions for register falsification. Defence strategies in such cases must now account for BNS procedure and evidence standards.
Part II — Key Changes at a Glance
| Amendment | Old | New |
|---|---|---|
| Chapter XX Heading | "Penalties" | "Punishments" — stronger criminal deterrent |
| Section 118 | Automatic punishment for Section 39 breach | Discretionary relief if invention non-sensitive |
| Section 119 | Patent-specific register falsification offence (2 years) | Omitted — prosecuted under BNS instead |
Part III — Action Items for Practitioners
- Update client advisories on Section 39 compliance — distinguish sensitive from non-sensitive inventions and advise on the new discretionary safeguard.
- Review past Section 39 violations — clients who inadvertently filed abroad in non-sensitive fields should consider petitioning for government certification of non-sensitivity.
- Update compliance manuals — Section 119 is gone; register falsification issues are now BNS matters requiring different procedural knowledge.
- Monitor government guidance on the procedure and timelines for invoking the Section 118 proviso — no official guidance published as of June 2026.
- Maintain documentation of invention nature, intended use, and non-sensitive characteristics to support any future government petition.