Section 65 of the Patents Act, 1970
Revocation of patent or amendment of complete specification on directions from Government in cases relating to atomic energy
Lets the Central Government have a granted patent revoked, or its claims cut back, when the invention falls within atomic energy.
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.
This is a simplified explanation. Where it differs from the official text of the provision, or from an applicable Gazette notification, the official text and the notification prevail.
What this section says, in plain language
Indian patent law keeps atomic energy out of the patent system altogether. Section 4 already bars the grant of a patent for an invention relating to atomic energy of the kind covered by the Atomic Energy Act, 1962. Section 65 is the repair tool for the case where such a patent has slipped through anyway and is sitting on the register.
The power starts with the Central Government, not with a rival or a member of the public. If the Government forms the view that a granted patent covers atomic energy subject matter, it directs the Controller to act. The Controller then puts the patentee on notice, hears the patentee and anyone else recorded as interested in the patent, and decides what to do.
The Controller has two outcomes to choose from. If the whole patent is built on atomic energy subject matter, the patent is revoked and the monopoly ends. If only some claims are affected, the Controller can instead allow the complete specification to be amended so that the offending subject matter is taken out, and the rest of the patent survives. This is a Government-triggered amendment, which is different from an amendment the patentee asks for on their own under section 57.
In practice this power touches a narrow set of fields: nuclear fuel and fuel fabrication, isotope separation, reactor design and reactor materials, and the handling or disposal of radioactive substances. Careful claim wording does not help, because the question is what the invention actually is, not how the claims are labelled. Work in these fields is often also caught by the defence secrecy machinery in section 35, so the same file can attract two different Government powers.
Why this section matters
Research institutions, national laboratories, universities and companies working near nuclear materials, radiation technology or reactor engineering, and anyone who buys or licenses such a patent.
After grant, at any stage in the life of the patent, once the Central Government forms its view.
A power for the Central Government to direct the Controller, a power for the Controller to revoke or to allow a narrowing amendment, and a right for the patentee to notice and a hearing first.
A patent that looked like a core asset can be wiped off the register, taking licence income and investor promises with it, and the patentee may learn of the problem only when the notice arrives.
How it works in practice
A coolant filter with one claim too many
Meghna Nuclear Materials Pvt Ltd, Hyderabad, obtains a patent on a ceramic filter housing used in high temperature coolant loops. Ten of its claims cover the housing and its manufacture. Three later claims, added during prosecution, cover a method of enriching a heavy isotope stream passing through the filter. Two years after grant, the Central Government takes the view that those three claims fall inside the atomic energy field and directs the Controller to act under section 65. The Controller issues a notice to Meghna and to its Vadodara licensee, both of whom appear at a hearing. Meghna does not defend the isotope claims. It offers instead to delete them and to trim the description that supported them. The Controller is satisfied that what remains is an ordinary engineering invention, allows the specification to be amended, and lets the patent stand in its reduced form. The licence for the filter housing continues; the isotope method is now free for anyone, and Meghna cannot sue on it.
Simplified illustration only. Actual legal outcomes depend on the facts.
Key points to remember
- Atomic energy inventions cannot be patented in India at all - section 4 blocks them at the door.
- Section 65 is the clean-up power for patents that were granted despite that bar.
- Only the Central Government can start the process; the Controller acts on its direction.
- The patentee must be given notice and an opportunity to be heard before anything is done.
- The Controller can revoke the whole patent or allow the specification to be amended to remove the atomic energy matter.
- The power can be used at any time while the patent is in force.
Common mistakes and misunderstandings
- Assuming that once a patent is granted, the atomic energy bar no longer matters. Grant does not cure the objection; it only changes who has to act on it.
- Thinking a competitor or an opponent can invoke section 65. They cannot. They would have to seek revocation on the usual grounds instead.
- Believing that dressing up an atomic energy claim in general engineering language protects it. The Controller looks at the substance of the invention.
Connected provisions
- ActSection 4Inventions relating to atomic energy not patentable
- ActSection 64Revocation of patents
- ActSection 57Amendment of application and specification before Controller
- ActSection 35Secrecy directions relating to inventions relevant for defence purposes
- ActSection 77Controller to have certain powers of a civil court
A section tells you what the law is. A rule tells you how the Patent Office runs it from day to day. The two are kept apart here so that a reader can quote the section accurately and then look up the current rule for the practical steps.
Forms, deadlines and fees
- No period runs from the date of grant. The Central Government can direct action at any time while the patent is alive.
- The Controller's notice fixes the date by which the patentee must reply and ask to be heard; that date is set case by case, not by a standard rule.
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.
Related judgments
No judgment summaries appear here yet. Our process requires a legal review of each case note before publication, covering the citation, the court and the point actually decided. Until a note for this provision has passed that check, the section stays empty rather than carrying unverified material. How case notes are prepared.
Questions people ask about Section 65
Can I keep the rest of my patent if only one claim relates to atomic energy?
Yes, that is exactly why the amendment option exists. If the atomic energy subject matter can be cleanly separated, the Controller can allow the complete specification to be amended so those claims and their supporting matter come out, and the remaining claims survive. You would normally propose the amendment yourself at the hearing so that the narrowing is done on terms you can live with. If the whole invention is atomic energy subject matter, there is nothing left to save and revocation follows.
Who decides whether an invention relates to atomic energy?
The Central Government forms the opinion, working through the department that administers atomic energy. The Controller then runs the hearing and passes the order. The reference point is the definition used in the Atomic Energy Act, 1962, not a general idea of what sounds nuclear. Ordinary radiation detection, medical imaging hardware or industrial X-ray equipment usually sit outside that definition, but the line is technical and specialists should look at the claims before you assume either way.
Is a section 65 revocation the same as revocation under section 64?
No. Section 64 revocation is about the usual validity grounds, such as lack of novelty, obviousness or insufficient disclosure, and it is normally raised in the High Court or as a counterclaim in an infringement suit. Section 65 is a special route driven by the Central Government and confined to atomic energy subject matter. The grounds, the person who starts it and the forum are all different.
Does a licensee get a say?
Anyone whose interest is recorded in the register in relation to the patent is entitled to notice and can be heard. That is one practical reason to record a licence or an assignment. A licensee who is on the register learns about the proceeding directly and can argue for the amendment route rather than outright revocation, which may save the part of the patent the licence actually depends on.
Does your invention brush against atomic energy law?
MYCrave Consultancy reviews claim sets in sensitive technology areas and advises on how to structure filings before an objection becomes a revocation.
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.