Trade Secret vs Patent in India: What to Patent, What to Keep Confidential, and How to Do Both

Your process team in Ankleshwar has spent eighteen months on one change: a catalyst ratio and temperature profile that lifts yield on your main dye intermediate by six per cent, worth around ₹60 lakh a year on your volumes. Nobody can tell from the finished product how you did it. Your patent agent says file. Your managing director says that the day you file, every competitor gets the recipe.

Both have a point. This guide works through the trade secret vs patent question in India: what the law protects when you keep something confidential, what a patent makes you give up, where each one fails, and how many manufacturers end up using both.

Quick answer

India has no trade secrets statute. Confidential know-how is protected through contracts (NDAs and employment terms), the equitable action for breach of confidence, and sometimes copyright, in line with TRIPS Article 39. A trade secret can last indefinitely, but it cannot stop independent development or reverse engineering. A patent gives 20 years of exclusivity against everyone, including independent inventors, but the application is published at 18 months and must disclose the best method you know. The working rule: patent what a competitor can see or work out from your product, and keep secret what stays inside your plant or server.

How India protects trade secrets without a trade secrets law

India has no statute on trade secrets, but it is bound by Article 39 of the TRIPS Agreement: undisclosed information must be protected if it is secret, has commercial value because it is secret, and has been subject to reasonable steps to keep it secret. Indian law does this through three older tools.

• Contract. NDAs, confidentiality clauses in appointment letters, and use restrictions in vendor and job-work contracts. Usually the firmest footing, because the document defines what is confidential.
• Breach of confidence. Someone who receives information in confidence cannot turn it against you, contract or no contract. In John Richard Brady v Chemical Process Equipments (Delhi High Court, 1987), a fabricator given drawings of a fodder production unit for a quotation soon began selling a similar machine, and was restrained.
• Copyright, sometimes. Drawings, source code and some compilations are protected works. Burlington Home Shopping v Rajnish Chibber (Delhi High Court, 1995) protected a mail-order customer database as a literary work. Since Eastern Book Company v D.B. Modak (Supreme Court, 2007), though, a compilation needs some skill and judgement, not just effort.

Criminal complaints under the Information Technology Act, 2000 and the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 can help recover files an employee took, but they don't give you an injunction against use.

Employees, non-competes and section 27

This is where many companies overestimate their protection. Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 makes every agreement restraining anyone from exercising a lawful profession, trade or business void to that extent. Its one written exception covers the sale of goodwill.

• During employment, restraints are generally fine. In Niranjan Shankar Golikari v Century Spinning and Manufacturing Co. (Supreme Court, 1967), a supervisor trained in a tyre cord process licensed from foreign collaborators left mid-contract for a rival. A negative covenant operating during employment was held not to be a restraint of trade, and was enforced.
• After employment, non-competes are generally void. In Superintendence Company of India v Krishan Murgai (Supreme Court, 1980), a two-year bar on joining a competitor was not enforced. Justice A.P. Sen's opinion, widely followed since, held that a service covenant extending beyond termination is void under section 27, while recognising that trade secrets can still be protected.
• Not everything you call confidential is. In American Express Bank v Priya Puri (Delhi High Court, 2006), customer details that could be found out by independent canvassing were held not to be trade secrets, and the injunction against a departing employee was vacated.

The practical rule: you can't stop people from leaving, but you can stop them from using your secrets. A confidentiality clause that survives employment, a clear assignment of inventions, and a notice period during which the employee is still bound will do more than a non-compete a court won't enforce.

The draft Protection of Trade Secrets Bill, 2024

In March 2024 the Law Commission of India submitted its 289th Report, Trade Secrets and Economic Espionage, attaching a draft Protection of Trade Secrets Bill, 2024. It proposed:

• a standalone civil law for trade secrets, with economic espionage left to separate legislation;
• a definition built on the three TRIPS conditions;
• exceptions for independent discovery, reverse engineering, whistleblowing and public interest, with room for compulsory licensing and government use;
• injunctions, damages and court confidentiality clubs, and no injunction against an employee joining a competitor without proof of actual misappropriation.

Status as of October 2026: not law. The Bill has not been enacted, and we have found no record of it being introduced in Parliament.

Its core test, reasonable steps to keep information secret, is already what Indian courts look for, so a secrecy programme built now fits either regime. Courts already protect secrets during litigation, too: rule 19 of the Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Rights Division Rules, 2022 provides for confidentiality clubs.

What a patent asks you to give up, and what it gives back

A patent is a bargain: you tell the public how the invention works, and get a time-limited monopoly in return.

• Publication at 18 months. Under section 11A of the Patents Act, 1970 and rule 24 of the Patents Rules, 2003, applications are published 18 months from the filing or priority date, whichever is earlier. You can request earlier publication on Form 9, but you cannot ask for it to be delayed.
• Full disclosure, including the best method. Section 10(4) requires the specification to describe the invention fully and to disclose the best method of performing it known to you. Holding it back is a revocation ground under section 64(1)(h).
• A fixed term. Twenty years from filing under section 53, if renewal fees are paid. After that, anyone can use it.

What you get back is strong. Section 48 lets the patentee stop others from making, using, offering for sale, selling or importing the product, or using the process. That works against everyone, including a competitor who invented the same thing independently or took your product apart. A trade secret can't do that. One catch: under section 11A(7) your rights date back to publication, but you can't sue until grant.

There is also a decision window. A provisional not followed by a complete specification within 12 months is deemed abandoned (section 9(1)), and an abandoned application, or one withdrawn at least three months before the 18-month mark, is not published (section 11A(3)). So you can file to secure a date and still choose secrecy before anything goes public, at the cost of that date. Our guide on how to patent an idea without disclosing it too early covers the sequencing.

What a trade secret cannot stop

A trade secret lasts only as long as the secret does. Once it is public, through a brochure, a trade fair demo or a published thesis, it is gone for everyone, and you have no claim against the rest of the market. Even while it lasts, it only protects you against people who obtain or use it improperly. Two gaps follow.

Independent development and reverse engineering

A competitor who works out your process alone, or buys your product and analyses it, has generally done nothing wrong unless it agreed by contract not to. The draft Bill would write both exceptions into law. A secret is weakest where the product itself gives the game away.

A competitor patents the same thing later

The Patents Act has no separate prior-user right: nothing in it expressly lets an earlier secret user carry on regardless of a later patent. What it has is section 64(1)(l). A patent can be revoked if the claimed invention was secretly used in India before the priority date, ignoring use only for reasonable trial or experiment (section 64(3)). Under section 107, every revocation ground is also a defence to an infringement suit.

So earlier secret use can be a shield, but it works by attacking the patent, not by giving you a personal licence, and only if you can prove it: dated batch records, trial reports and invoices showing that what you ran in India falls within what the patent claims.

The clause cuts both ways. Run a process commercially in secret for years and then patent it, and your own earlier use, beyond reasonable trial or experiment, can be raised against your patent. Secrecy first and patenting later is a risky sequence in India. Decide early.

Patent or secret: a decision table

Run each development through these questions separately. One product often has parts that belong on different sides.

If the answers split, the hybrid approach below is usually the answer.

Two sector notes

Food and chemical formulations often meet section 3(e), which excludes mere admixtures that only aggregate the properties of their components. A spice blend without a real synergistic effect may not be patentable at all, so secrecy becomes the default (see what can be patented in India).

Software startups face section 3(k), which excludes mathematical or business methods, computer programmes per se and algorithms. Server-side logic that customers never see is a natural trade secret, though a technical effect can still support a patent (see software and AI patents under section 3(k)).

The hybrid approach: a worked example

Many manufacturers do both: they patent what the market can see and keep secret what it can't. The skill lies in drawing the line so that the patent doesn't give away the secret.

A simplified illustration. A company in Makarpura GIDC, Vadodara, making cartridge filters for industrial water treatment, has developed three things:

1. A snap-lock end cap that seats the cartridge without tools and stops bypass leakage. Cut a cartridge open and you can see how it works.
2. A bonding recipe: the resin blend, cure temperature profile and dwell times that bond the filter media to the cap. It took fourteen months of trials and sharply cut field leaks. Nothing in the product reveals it.
3. A supplier and pricing file built up over years.

Here is how we would split it.

• End cap: patent. As a secret it would last until a competitor bought one. File a provisional before distributors or trade fair visitors see it, and the complete specification within 12 months. Publication reveals nothing the product won't. If the shape is distinctive, consider a design registration too; our guide to what each IP right protects explains the difference.
• Bonding recipe: trade secret. A process patent would publish the numbers and be hard to police on someone else's shop floor. Instead, the full recipe sits in one controlled document, operators run locked recipes, the resin supplier signs an NDA, and dated batch records are kept.
• Supplier file: confidential information. Not patentable. Protected by confidentiality terms and access control.

Now the checkpoint: does the end cap only work with the secret recipe? The best-method duty in section 10(4)(b) attaches to what you claim. If the claims cover the end cap, and it performs with ordinary bonding methods described in the specification, the recipe is a separate manufacturing improvement. Widen the claims to the bonded assembly, and if the recipe is the best method the company knows of making it, it would arguably have to be disclosed, or the patent would be open to revocation under section 64(1)(h). Settle this before drafting.

A secrecy programme checklist

In a dispute, the court will ask whether you treated the information as secret. Each item below builds that evidence.

• Keep a trade secret register. List each secret specifically: what it is, where it lives, who is responsible, who has access, and when it was created. In Rochem Separation Systems v Nirtech (Bombay High Court, 2023), an injunction against former employees was vacated where the information was not clearly identified, and the drawings turned out to be in an expired US patent.
• Mark selectively. Label truly confidential documents and files. Stamping everything "confidential" weakens the label where it matters.
• Control access. Need-to-know permissions, split recipes, locked machine settings, access logs, and limits on pen drives and personal email.
• Sign NDAs before disclosure. Toolmakers, job workers, testing labs, investors and distributors. Define the purpose, require return of material, and make the duty survive the deal.
• Fix employee agreements. Confidentiality that survives exit, assignment of inventions, a defined notice period rather than a post-employment non-compete, and written confirmation from new hires that they bring no former employer's confidential material.
• Fix vendor agreements. Ownership of drawings, tooling and moulds, no use for anyone else, and return of materials when the job ends.
• Run a real exit process. Revoke access on the last day, recover devices, check unusual downloads, and remind the leaver in writing of continuing obligations.
• Record every invention decision. A dated disclosure form and a recorded call: patent, design, secret or publish.
• Preserve the evidence trail, and review it yearly. Signed NDAs, access logs, training and batch records prove your reasonable steps, and they are what you would need under section 64(1)(l) if a competitor patents your process later.

How MYCrave can help

MYCrave Consultancy & Services works on the patent side of this decision and on the records that make a secret defensible:

• IP Exposure Review for manufacturers: a register of what your company owns, products already past the point of protection, gaps in employee and contractor agreements, and a costed twelve-month plan.
• Patent search, drafting and filing for the parts worth patenting, with the best-method question worked through before the specification is written.
• Freedom-to-operate searches before you commit to a process you plan to keep secret, so you know whether someone else already holds a patent that covers it.

Decide before anyone sees it

The patent-or-secret decision is usually lost by default, not by choice. A product goes to a trade fair, a recipe sits on a shared drive, an engineer leaves with a pen drive, and the options close one by one.

So make the decision on purpose, invention by invention, while every option is still open, and write down why. Patent what the market can see. Guard what it can't. And keep the records that prove you did both.

Frequently asked questions

Keep reading