Shroff Geeta’s patent application 3853/COL/MP/2008 filed in 2008 for a composition comprising human embryonic stem cells derived from 2–7 day old human embryos and their derivatives was rejected by the Controller on 24.09.2018 primarily under Section 3(b) of the Patents Act, 1970 holding that the invention necessarily involved destructive use of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes which is contrary to public order and morality. The applicant appealed under Section 117A contending that the invention did not necessarily destroy embryos and the Controller misapplied Section 3(b). The Calcutta High Court dismissed the appeal on 17.11.2025 upholding the refusal, holding that derivation of human embryonic stem cells by immunological or mechanical isolation from the inner cell mass of the embryo inevitably requires destructive use of the embryo, that commercial exploitation of such cells is contrary to morality and public order, and that the Controller’s order was reasoned, in conformity with the National Guidelines for Stem Cell Research 2017 and required no interference.
- Inventions involving derivation of human embryonic stem cells by destructive isolation from human embryos (even at blastocyst stage) are hit by Section 3(b) of the Patents Act, 1970 as being contrary to public order or morality (Para 9-10).
- Commercial or industrial use of human embryos or embryonic stem cells obtained by processes that lead to destruction of the embryo is non-patentable under Section 3(b) irrespective of the therapeutic potential of the invention (Para 10).
- Section 3(b) excludes inventions whose primary or intended use or commercial exploitation is contrary to morality even if the invention is novel and inventive (Para 6-7, 10).
- Use of human embryos for industrial or commercial purposes falls within the classic examples of immoral inventions excluded from patentability (Para 8).
Case Title: Shroff Geeta Vs Asst. Controller of Patents and Design
Order Date: 17 November 2025
Case Number: IPDPTA/88/2023 (OA/10/2019/PT/KOL)
Neutral Citation: Not yet assigned
Court: High Court at Calcutta (Original Side – Intellectual Property Rights Division)
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur
[Readers are advised not to treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation]
[Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi]
