Section 122 of the Patents Act, 1970
Refusal or failure to supply information
Section 122 penalises failing to give information the Act requires about a patent, and knowingly giving false information.
Official legal text
The verbatim statutory text of this provision is reproduced from the official source and checked by our legal reviewer before it is published here. Until that check is complete for this page, read the exact wording directly from the official source linked below — it is the only version that governs.
Read this as a plain-language summary. If it and the official text, or a relevant Gazette notification, say different things, the official text and the notification are what count.
What this section says, in plain language
The patent system gives an exclusive right in exchange for disclosure and for the invention being worked in India. To check whether that bargain is being kept, the law lets officials ask questions. Section 146 allows the Controller to call on a patentee or a licensee for information about the extent to which a patented invention has been worked commercially in India, and requires periodic statements of working. Section 100(5) requires a patentee whose invention is used by or for the Government to supply information about the extent of that use when asked. Section 122 backs both duties.
There are two limbs. The first covers refusing or failing, without lawful excuse, to give information or a statement that the Act requires. The second covers furnishing information which the person knows, or has reason to believe, is false. The second is treated more seriously than mere silence, because a false working statement can distort decisions about compulsory licences and public interest. After the Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023, the consequence takes the form of a monetary penalty imposed through the adjudication process in Section 124A rather than imprisonment.
The duty that most patentees actually meet is the working statement. Under Section 146 read with Rule 131, a patentee and every licensee must file a statement about the working of the patented invention in India using the prescribed form. Since the 2020 amendment to the Rules, the statement is filed once for each financial year, and the period for filing runs from the end of that financial year. Check the current text of Rule 131 for the exact period and the first year for which a statement is due after grant.
Working statements are public documents. Anyone can inspect them, and they are read closely by competitors, by parties considering an application for a compulsory licence under Section 84, and by researchers studying access to medicines and technology. A statement that says nothing useful can invite exactly the scrutiny the patentee hoped to avoid. The practical approach is to gather manufacturing, import and licensing data through the year, describe the position accurately, explain honestly if the invention has not been worked and why, and file on time.
Why this section matters
Every patentee and licensee of an Indian patent, including universities, MSMEs and multinational groups.
Each year when the working statement is due, and whenever the Controller or the Government asks for information.
A duty to supply required information truthfully and on time, backed by a monetary penalty for failure or for false statements.
Penalty proceedings under Section 124A, a poor record if a compulsory licence is later sought, and loss of credibility in any dispute.
How it works in practice
A working statement filed in a hurry
Bharat Membrane Sciences Pvt Ltd holds an Indian patent on a filtration membrane. The company has never manufactured in India and imports a small quantity through a distributor. When the working statement falls due, a junior accountant fills the form in ten minutes and records that the invention has been worked in India on a large scale, because that sounds better than admitting limited use. A competitor preparing a compulsory licence application under Section 84 downloads the statement, compares it with the company's own import filings and public annual report, and points out the mismatch. The company is now in a worse position than if it had told the truth. Knowingly furnishing false information attracts a penalty under Section 122, adjudicated under Section 124A, and the inconsistency will be used against it in the compulsory licence proceedings. An accurate statement, saying that use is limited to imports and explaining the plan for local manufacture, would have cost nothing.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- Refusing or failing without lawful excuse to supply information required under the Act attracts a penalty.
- Knowingly furnishing false information is treated as the more serious limb of the section.
- The most common duty in practice is the working statement under Section 146 read with Rule 131.
- Since the Jan Vishwas Act, 2023, these consequences are penalties adjudicated under Section 124A.
- Working statements are public and are used by competitors and by compulsory licence applicants.
- If an invention has not been worked, say so and explain the position rather than guessing or exaggerating.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Thinking working statements are optional for small patentees. The duty applies to every patentee and licensee, whatever the size of the business.
- Assuming nobody reads these filings. They are public records and are routinely used as evidence in compulsory licence and policy debates.
- Treating a nil statement as an admission of failure. Not working an invention is not an offence; giving false information about it is what this section punishes.
- Leaving the form to a junior with no access to sales, import or licensing data, which is how inaccurate statements get filed.
Connected provisions
- ActSection 146Power of Controller to call for information from patentees
- ActSection 100Power of Central Government to use inventions for purposes of Government
- ActSection 84Compulsory licences
- ActSection 124AAdjudication of penalties
- ActSection 83General principles applicable to working of patented inventions
Indian patent law works in two layers. The Act carries the substance and the Rules carry the machinery. Because the layers are amended by different processes and at different times, they are presented in separate blocks instead of being merged into one description.
Forms, deadlines and fees
Forms are not set out in the Act. They are prescribed in the Second Schedule to the Patents Rules and are revised from time to time, so obtain the current version from the official website before filing.
- A statement of working under Section 146(2) is filed for each financial year, within the period fixed by Rule 131 after that financial year ends; confirm the current period and the first year due after grant.
- When the Controller calls for information under Section 146(1), the notice fixes the time for replying, and an extension must be requested before that time runs out.
- Information sought under Section 100(5) about Government use must be supplied within the time stated in the request.
Open the deadline calculator — and have every date confirmed against the current Rules before you rely on it.
The official fee for anything described on this page is set out in the First Schedule to the Patents Rules. It is not the same for every applicant, and it is not the same for online and physical filing, which is why no amount is stated here. How Indian patent fees work.
Amendment history
What changed in this provision, newest first. Read the footnotes in the official consolidated text for the full record.
- 2023The Jan Vishwas (Amendment of Provisions) Act, 2023Imprisonment was removed for supplying false information and the offence became a monetary penalty, with the amount for false information capped by reference to turnover.
- 2005The Patents (Amendment) Act, 2005The maximum fine for refusing or failing to supply information was increased.
Compiled from official consolidated texts and Gazette notifications. See the site-wide change log.
Related judgments
This part of the page is reserved for summaries of decided cases. They are added one at a time, after review by a person qualified to confirm that the summary matches the judgment. Nothing has been cleared for this provision so far, so there is nothing to show. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Section 122
Who has to file a patent working statement in India?
Both the patentee and every licensee of the patent. The duty comes from Section 146(2) read with Rule 131, and the statement is filed on the prescribed form for each financial year after grant. Joint patentees may file a single statement covering all of them. If the invention has not been worked in India, that fact is reported along with the reasons and the steps being taken. There is no advantage in silence, because failing to file is itself a contravention under Section 122.
What happens if I do not file a working statement?
Failing without lawful excuse to supply information required under the Act attracts a monetary penalty, now imposed by an adjudicating officer under Section 124A after an inquiry in which you can be heard. Beyond the penalty, non-filing can hurt you in other proceedings. If someone applies for a compulsory licence under Section 84 on the ground that the reasonable requirements of the public are not met, the absence of any record of working leaves you with little to show. Filing on time and accurately is the cheaper course.
Is a false working statement worse than not filing at all?
The Act treats knowingly furnishing false information as the graver limb of Section 122, and courts and officials view it seriously because these statements feed into decisions about public access to patented technology. A false statement also destroys the credibility of everything else the patentee says in later proceedings. If a statement filed earlier turns out to be wrong, take professional advice quickly about correcting the record rather than repeating the error in the next year's filing.
Does the Government have to pay for information about its use of my patent?
The information duty and the compensation question are separate. Section 100 allows the Central Government and persons authorised by it to use a patented invention for Government purposes, and Section 100(5) obliges the patentee to supply information about the extent of that use when asked. Compensation for Government use is dealt with under Sections 100 and 103, which provide for agreed terms and, failing agreement, determination by the High Court. Answer the information request within time and pursue the compensation question through the route the Act provides.
Is your Form 27 working statement due this year?
MYCrave Consultancy helps patentees and licensees prepare accurate working statements and respond to information notices.
You will be speaking with MYCrave Consultancy & Services, the firm that operates this platform. General questions are answered free; matter‑specific work is quoted before anything is done.