Section 36 of the Patents Act, 1970
Secrecy directions to be periodically reviewed
Section 36 requires secrecy directions to be reconsidered regularly and on the applicant's request, so an application is not kept secret indefinitely.
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.
Treat this page as a guide. The provision as officially published, along with the Gazette notifications that apply to it, remains the governing text and overrides any simplification here.
What this section says, in plain language
A secrecy direction is a heavy restriction. It stops publication, blocks foreign filing, holds up grant and limits what the applicant may say to anyone. Technology, however, moves. A material that was sensitive when the application was filed may be openly published by others three years later. Section 36 exists so that the restriction is tested against current facts instead of continuing by default.
The section requires the Central Government to reconsider whether the invention is still relevant for defence purposes. That reconsideration happens at regular intervals set by the Act, which follows a six-monthly cycle, and it must also happen when the applicant makes a request for it. If on reconsideration it appears that publication of the invention would no longer be prejudicial to the defence of India, the Controller revokes the directions.
The applicant is entitled to be told the outcome. The result of every reconsideration must be communicated in the manner and within the period set by the Rules, and Rule 72 deals with that communication. Since the Rules are amended from time to time, the current text should be checked rather than assumed.
The applicant's right to request a review is the part most worth using. If the technology has been openly published elsewhere, if a foreign equivalent has been granted and published, or if the defence application has fallen away, that material can be placed before the Government through the Controller in support of a request. A well-evidenced request is more likely to change the outcome than waiting for the next scheduled review.
Keep a clear record of every review, every communication and every date. When the directions are eventually revoked, section 38 allows the Controller to extend time limits that expired while they were in force, and those extensions are easier to obtain when the chronology is documented.
Why this section matters
Applicants whose Indian applications are under secrecy directions, and their agents, investors and licensees who need to know how long the restriction will last.
It operates throughout the life of the directions, at each scheduled review and whenever the applicant asks for a reconsideration.
It creates a duty on the Central Government to review the directions periodically and on request, and a right in the applicant to be told the result.
The directions can continue simply because nobody asked for a review, delaying grant, foreign filing and commercial use long after the defence concern has passed.
How it works in practice
A review request that lifts a long-standing direction
Three years after Ashwa Aerospace Pvt Ltd received secrecy directions on its radar absorbing composite, two research groups in other countries publish detailed papers on very similar resin and ferrite formulations, and a foreign patent covering comparable material is granted and published. Ashwa's agent prepares a request for reconsideration under section 36 and files it with the Controller. It attaches the published papers, the foreign patent specification and a short technical comparison showing that the essential teaching is now in the public domain. The Central Government reconsiders the matter and concludes that publication would no longer be prejudicial to the defence of India. The Controller revokes the directions and the result is communicated to Ashwa. The application, already found in order for grant under section 37, moves to grant, and Ashwa applies under section 38 for extension of the time limits that expired while the directions were in force.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- The Central Government must reconsider whether the invention remains relevant for defence purposes.
- The Act provides for review at six-monthly intervals and also on a request made by the applicant.
- If publication would no longer be prejudicial to the defence of India, the Controller revokes the directions.
- The result of each reconsideration must be communicated to the applicant as the Rules require, and Rule 72 covers this.
- A request supported by evidence of open publication elsewhere is the applicant's most effective tool.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Waiting passively for the directions to lapse. They do not expire on their own, and the applicant's right to request a review is often the quickest route.
- Sending a bare request with no evidence. A reconsideration is decided on defence considerations, so material showing the technology is already public carries the argument.
- Failing to record the review correspondence. Those dates matter when applying for extensions of time under section 38 after revocation.
Connected provisions
Sections and rules are different kinds of law. A section is enacted by Parliament, while a rule is made by the Central Government using powers the Act grants. Keeping them apart shows which text you are reading and which of the two is more likely to have been revised recently.
Forms, deadlines and fees
- The Act provides for reconsideration of secrecy directions at six-monthly intervals, and also whenever the applicant requests a review.
- The result of each reconsideration must be communicated to the applicant within the time and in the manner set by the Rules; check Rule 72 for the current wording.
Open the deadline calculator — and have every date confirmed against the current Rules before you rely on it.
This site does not carry a fee table. The First Schedule to the Patents Rules is the source, the rates vary with the applicant's category and with the mode of filing, and a figure quoted second-hand goes out of date quietly. How Indian patent fees work.
Related judgments
Court decisions shape how this provision is applied, but a summary is useful only if it is right. Every case note on this site is read by a legal reviewer before it goes live, and none has been completed for this provision so far. This section will fill in as those reviews finish. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Section 36
How often can I ask for a secrecy direction to be reviewed?
The Act provides for reconsideration by the Central Government at regular intervals on a six-monthly cycle, and separately allows the applicant to make a request. Repeated requests with no new material are unlikely to achieve anything, because the question is a defence assessment rather than a procedural one. The sensible approach is to file a request when something has genuinely changed, such as open publication of equivalent technology, a granted and published foreign patent, or a change in the intended application of the invention.
Will I be told why the directions are being continued?
The Act requires that the result of each reconsideration be communicated to the applicant in the manner the Rules prescribe. The reasoning behind a defence assessment is not necessarily shared, because the assessment itself may involve sensitive considerations. Section 41 also gives finality to orders made under this Chapter, which limits ordinary challenges to the decision. In practice the applicant's leverage lies in placing good evidence before the Government rather than in contesting the reasoning.
Do renewal or other deadlines keep running while directions are in force?
Ordinary time limits under the Act and the Rules do not stop simply because directions have been issued, which is exactly why section 38 exists. Once the directions are revoked, the Controller may extend the time for doing anything required in connection with the application, even where that time has already expired. Keep a dated list of every act that fell due during the period so that the extension request can be made promptly and completely after revocation.
Are secrecy directions still holding up your application?
MYCrave Consultancy prepares evidence-backed review requests under section 36 and follows through to revocation and grant.
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.