Sections 35 explained: this guide covers what it means, who it applies to, the step-by-step process, documents required, fees, due dates and penalties in India — so you can stay compliant with confidence and avoid costly mistakes.
Chapter VII of the Act allows an application to be held back from the public when the invention is relevant for defence purposes. Under section 35 the Controller can restrict publication or communication of information about the invention, and the Central Government decides whether publication would harm the defence of India. Section 36 requires the Central Government to review those directions at intervals of six months. If you work on technology with possible defence use, understanding these provisions before you file is a matter for a careful legal consultation.
The Controller may prohibit or restrict publication of information about an invention that is of a class notified by the Central Government as relevant for defence purposes, or that otherwise appears to him to be so relevant (35(1)). He notifies the Central Government, which considers whether publication would be prejudicial to the defence of India and, if not, tells him to revoke the direction (35(2)). The Central Government can itself flag an invention before grant (35(3)). The question is reconsidered every six months or on the applicant's reasonable request (36(1)).
Section 35: giving the directions
Section 35(1): who may be directed, and what the Controller can do
"Where, in respect of an application made before or after the commencement of this Act for a patent, it appears to the Controller that the invention is one of a class notified to him by the Central Government as relevant for defence purposes, or, where otherwise the invention appears to him to be so relevant, he may give directions for prohibiting or restricting the publication of information with respect to the invention or the communication of such information."
Points to note:
- Two routes. The invention is within a class notified by the Central Government as relevant for defence purposes; or it otherwise appears to the Controller to be so relevant.
- Any application. The words "made before or after the commencement of this Act" cover applications on either side of the Act's start date.
- What the directions do. They prohibit or restrict "the publication of information with respect to the invention or the communication of such information". Earlier wording limited them to communication "to any person or class of persons specified in the directions"; those words were omitted by the Patents (Amendment) Act, 2002 (with effect from 20-5-2003), so the restriction is no longer tied to specified persons.
- Discretion. The Controller "may" give directions. The text does not say how he judges relevance.
Section 35(2): the Central Government decides
"Where the Controller gives any such directions as are referred to in sub-section (1), he shall give notice of the application and of the directions to the Central Government, and the Central Government shall, upon receipt of such notice, consider whether the publication of the invention would be prejudicial to the defence of India, and if upon such consideration, it appears to it that the publication of the invention would not so prejudice, give notice to the Controller to that effect, who shall thereupon revoke the directions and notify the applicant accordingly."
The steps:
- The Controller gives directions.
- He must notify the Central Government of the application and the directions.
- The Central Government considers whether publication would be prejudicial to the defence of India.
- If it concludes publication would not be prejudicial, it tells the Controller, who shall revoke the directions and notify the applicant.
The Act gives no time for the Central Government's consideration in this sub-section.
Section 35(3): the Central Government's own notice
"Without prejudice to the provisions contained in sub-section (1), where the Central Government is of opinion that an invention in respect of which the Controller has not given any directions under sub-section (1), is relevant for defence purposes, it may at any time before grant of patent notify the Controller to that effect, and thereupon the provisions of that sub-section shall apply as if the invention were one of the class notified by the Central Government, and accordingly the Controller shall give notice to the Central Government of the directions issued by him."
Even if the Controller has given no directions, the Central Government may, at any time before grant of patent, notify the Controller that an invention is relevant for defence purposes. Sub-section (1) then applies as if the invention were in a notified class. The words "grant of patent" replaced "acceptance of complete specification" in 2005.
Section 36: periodic review
Section 36(1): every six months
"The question whether an invention in respect of which directions have been given under section 35 continues to be relevant for defence purposes shall be reconsidered by the Central Government at intervals of six months or on a request made by the applicant which is found to be reasonable by the Controller and if, on such reconsideration it appears to the Central Government that the publication of the invention would no longer be prejudicial to the defence of India or in case of an application filed by a foreign applicant it is found that the invention is published outside India it shall forthwith give notice to the Controller to revoke the direction and the Controllers shall thereupon revoke the directions previously given by him."
| Element | Text |
|---|---|
| Who reviews | The Central Government |
| When | "at intervals of six months", or on the applicant's request "found to be reasonable by the Controller" |
| Two grounds for revocation | Publication "would no longer be prejudicial to the defence of India"; or, for a foreign applicant, the invention "is published outside India" |
| Result | The Central Government "shall forthwith" tell the Controller, who "shall thereupon revoke" |
The interval of six months replaced "twelve months" in 2005, and the whole of sub-section (1) was substituted by the 2002 Act. Any older text that says twelve months is out of date. (The printed text has "Controllers" where "Controller" is meant; a typographical slip.)
Section 36(2): telling the applicant
"The result of every re-consideration under sub-section (1), shall be communicated to the applicant within such time and in such manner as may be prescribed."
The applicant is told the result of each review, in the time and manner prescribed. The Act gives no number of days.
Example. Brahma Dynamics, a fictional company, files an application for a lightweight armour plate. The Controller considers the invention relevant for defence purposes and gives directions restricting publication. He notifies the Central Government, which examines whether publication would prejudice the defence of India. The directions remain in force and are reconsidered every six months. At one review, the Central Government concludes publication would no longer be prejudicial and tells the Controller to revoke. The Controller revokes and the result is communicated to the company in the prescribed way. If the company were a foreign applicant and the invention became published outside India, that too is a ground for revocation under section 36(1).
How these sections link to others
- Publication. An application under a secrecy direction is not published on the normal timetable; section 11A(3)(a) excludes it, and 11A(4) says it is published after the prescribed period or when the direction has ceased to operate, whichever is later. See our article on section 11A.
- Examination request. Under the proviso to section 11B(4), where a secrecy direction has been issued, the request for examination may be made within the prescribed period from the date of revocation.
- Consequences and revocation. Sections 37 and 38 deal with what follows while directions are in force and the extension of time on revocation; see our next article on sections 37 and 38.
- Applying abroad. Residents of India need permission before applying outside India (section 39), covered later in this series.
What these sections do not say
- They do not define "relevant for defence purposes" or "prejudicial to the defence of India".
- They do not say how the Central Government notifies a class, or how long it takes to decide.
- They do not provide for an appeal against a direction in these sections; section 37(1)(b) says no appeal lies from orders of the Controller passed in respect of an application while directions are in force.
- They give no forms or fees.
Need help with ...?
If your invention may touch defence-relevant technology, the way you file and what you disclose before filing matter. Our team can discuss the position in a legal consultation before you decide on timing.
Key takeaways
- The Controller may restrict publication or communication of information on inventions notified as relevant for defence purposes or that appear to him to be so relevant.
- He must notify the Central Government, which considers whether publication would prejudice the defence of India and may require revocation.
- The Central Government may itself flag an invention at any time before grant.
- Directions are reconsidered every six months, or on a reasonable request by the applicant.
- A foreign applicant's direction can be revoked if the invention is published outside India.
Read next
- Section 37 and 38: consequences and revocation of secrecy directions
- Section 39 and 40: residents not to apply outside India
- Section 11A: publication of applications
- Inventions not patentable: section 4 (atomic energy)
Disclaimer: Based on the Patents Act, 1970 as amended up to the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, as consulted on 1 October 2026. Forms, fees and time limits under the Patents Rules, 2003 change from time to time and are not covered here. This article is general information, not legal advice; check the official text before acting.