The Indian Patents Act, 1970 lays down specific criteria that an invention must satisfy to be considered patentable, ensuring that only genuine, useful, and innovative contributions receive legal protection. These criteria are primarily embodied in Sections 2(1)(j), 2(1)(ja), and 2(1)(ac), along with the exclusions provided under Sections 3 and 4. The three fundamental requirements for patentability under Indian law are novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability, all of which must be satisfied cumulatively. Novelty refers to the newness of an invention. An invention is considered novel if it has not been anticipated by prior art. Prior art includes any information relating to the invention that has been disclosed to the public anywhere in the world before the date of filing of the patent application. This disclosure may occur through publication in documents, use, or in any other form. The Indian patent system follows the absolute novelty standard, meaning that even disclosure by the inventor before filing can destroy novelty unless it falls within certain limited exceptions such as those provided under Section 31 relating to exhibitions. The assessment of novelty involves comparing the claimed invention with prior art to determine whether all its essential features are already disclosed. If even a single prior document or instance of prior use reveals the complete invention, the claim fails the novelty requirement. The second essential criterion is the presence of an inventive step, also referred to as non-obviousness. Under Section 2(1)(ja), an inventive step means a feature of an invention that involves technical advance as compared to existing knowledge or has economic significance or both, and that makes the invention not obvious to a person skilled in the art. This hypothetical “person skilled in the art” is presumed to have ordinary knowledge and skills in the relevant technical field but lacks inventive capability. The test for inventive step evaluates whether the invention is sufficiently distinct from prior art and not an obvious modification or combination of existing knowledge. Courts and patent examiners often use problem-solution approaches or the “could-would” test to determine obviousness. If the invention merely involves routine experimentation, minor variations, or aggregation of known features without a synergistic effect, it will not meet this requirement. The inclusion of economic significance in the Indian definition broadens the scope slightly, allowing certain commercially valuable innovations to qualify if they demonstrate a meaningful advancement. Industrial applicability, the third requirement, is defined under Section 2(1)(ac) as the capability of the invention to be made or used in an industry. This criterion ensures that patents are granted only for inventions that have practical