Section 27 of the Indian Contract Act-1872 provides that ”Every agreement by which anyone is restrained from exercising a lawful profession or trade or business of any kind, is to that extent void”.
Exception : One who sells goodwill of a business with a buyer to refrain from carrying on a similar business within specified local limits so long as the buyer, or any person deriving title to the goodwill from him, carries on a like business therein provided that such limits appear to the court reasonable, regard being had to the nature of business.
the forcible signature for the non disclosure agreement is not valid in law nor it is enforceable.
Dont worry about the political or any other pressure, you can fight is out in court of law properly.
You can engage the services of an advocate who can understand law and not the unwilling person.
Indian law is therefore very clear and strict on this point, any such non compete agreement shall not be binding on the parties and the same shall be null and void.
Although section 27 of the Indian Contract Act states that all agreements in restraint of any profession, trade or business are void, the current trend as per various judicial pronouncements leads to the conclusion that reasonable restraint can be permitted to some extent and does not render the contract void ab initio. Reasonable of restraint depends upon various factors, and the restraint in order to prevent divulge of trade secrets or business connections has to be reasonable in the interest of the parties to ensure adequate protection to the covenant. On careful analysis of section 27 keeping in view the exception provided with it, it can be safely concluded that the section implies that, to be valid an agreement in restraint of trade must be reasonable between the parties and consistent with the interest of the public.