As genetic research becomes more advanced, our ability to use plants and animals to produce new medicines or change crops to fulfil food safety needs is also growing. Sometimes, researchers draw on the conventional knowledge of local people about the properties of a specific plant, animal or chemical compound in the quest for new bioresources. If scientists use conventional knowledge without permission or misuse the cultures from which they draw, it is called biopiracy. Biopiracy occurs when researchers or research agencies, largely from less prosperous nations or disadvantaged persons, take biological resources without official authorization. Biopiracy is not restricted to the production of medicines. In agricultural and industrial settings, it also occurs. For various lucrative purposes, Indian products such as the neem tree, tamarind, turmeric and Darjeeling tea have all been patented by international companies. The Indian Parliament has passed many laws over the last couple of decades to protect the rights of indigenous peoples. The National Biodiversity Act, 2002, aims to protect traditional knowledge by regulating the use of such information by a foreigner, an Indian citizen and a corporate body controlled by an Indian citizen. Nevertheless, while this act attempts to preserve aboriginal knowledge, it has been subject to immense criticism based on its inherent limitations. One of its main flaws is that it does not give sufficient conservation consideration and places an undisputed emphasis on preventing the commercial use of biological resources from profit-sharing. Although the sub-stratum of the Act is indeed intended by developing nations to avoid biopiracy, the greatest purpose is to protect biodiversity. Another widely criticized clause allows an aggrieved gain claimant to provide advance warning of his or her intention to make a complaint. Otherwise, an individual is expected to lodge a complaint with the National Biodiversity Authority, which then takes the necessary steps. To all men, the absence of locus standi is worrying. Section 3(p) of the Indian Patent Act 1970, which prohibits patent rights for inventions requiring the use of conventional knowledge or any replication or aggregation of that knowledge, contains other laws propagating the above-mentioned cause. The Conservation of Plant Varieties and Farmers' Rights Act 2001, the Geographical Indication of Products (Registration and Protection) Act 1999 and the Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 also provide protection. With the evolution of society, IP rights have been an integral part of the information economy's growth. Indigenous security has been placed on the back burner by the politicisation of research. The biopiracy debate is not a fresh one, but it remains as prominent as it was more than half a century ago. When the world remains fragmented, so does the scientific community in its threshold of morals and ethics. While the inherent limitations of such agreements can be easily overcome by modifications, the problem of biopiracy will continue to draw a horizon of opinions, subject to the disposition and awareness of both individuals and societies.

This Article Does Not Intend To Hurt The Sentiments Of Any Individual Community, Sect, Or Religion Etcetera. This Article Is Based Purely On The Authors Personal Views And Opinions In The Exercise Of The Fundamental Right Guaranteed Under Article 19(1)(A) And Other Related Laws Being Force In India, For The Time Being. Further, despite all efforts that have been made to ensure the accuracy and correctness of the information published, White Code Legal and Tax shall not be responsible for any errors caused due to human error or otherwise.