India will defy Basmati patent in US, SC assured

When Salve said expert opinion was being taken and the government would challenge the patent in two months, Justice Anand remarked "sooner the better".

Arguing for the petitioner, senior advocate Indira Jaising said Government had assured the court in November 1998 that it was taking steps to challenge the patent on Basmati granted to Rice Tech in September 1997.

"The process of taking steps by the Government is so prolonged that it harms national interest," Jaising said.

Salve said the government was drafting a biodiversity legislation and once it comes into force, several such grievances would be taken care of.

The Court adjourned hearing on the petition for two months and asked the government to indicate the steps taken by it on the issue.

The Court on March 13 had issued notice to Agriculture Ministry when the petitioner had alleged that close on the heels of Basmati rice being patented by Rice Tech, `Karela’ (bitter gourd), Jamun (blackberry) and Brinjal have been patented by another American company Cromak Research Inc.

Giving details of bio-piracy, which allegedly continues despite assurances by the Government, the petitioner had said Karela, Jamun, Gurmar and Brinjal were patented by Cromak under number US6900240 for anti-diabetic properties.

Salve informed the court that Cromak is a company formed by three individuals of which two are Indians and they have patented only a quality of bitter gourd.

The petitioner alleged that `Indian Curry’ was also patented in Japan which was an example of the Government’s “failure” to protect the national interest.