The Nepalese government has said that it cannot confirm whether it possesses the original 1816 Sugauli Treaty papers, which defined its boundary with British India. The uncertainty has returned to the spotlight as the Lipulekh-Kalapani-Limpiyadhura dispute with India simmers.

A 210-year-old treaty is at the heart of the most persistent border dispute between civilisational neighbours, India and Nepal. There’s just one problem. Nepal isn’t sure where the original treaty papers are. The Nepalese government has told its Parliament that it could not confirm whether it possessed the original 1816 Treaty of Sugauli, which defined the Himalayan kingdom’s boundary with British India.

A parliamentary enquiry had searched archives, ministries and museums but failed to locate the original treaty papers. The uncertainty has returned to the spotlight just as the Lipulekh-Kalapani-Limpiyadhura dispute with India simmered in the recent past.

The Sugauli Treaty is at the heart of Nepal’s argument that Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani belong to it, while India maintains the areas are part of its Uttarakhand state. The border dispute between India and Nepal hinges substantially on the contrasting interpretations of where the Kali, or Mahakali, river originates because the treaty made the river Nepal’s western boundary.

The border dispute, stemming from the Treaty of Sugauli, has repeatedly rocked India-Nepal ties. Former Nepal PM KP Sharma Oli turned the territorial dispute into a major nationalist issue in 2020, when his government was in trouble. It published a new political map incorporating all three disputed areas and got Parliament to endorse it through a constitutional amendment. India rejected the move as an “artificial enlargement” of Nepal’s territorial claims, and bilateral relations came under severe strain.

The revelation that Nepal couldn’t find the treaty papers also comes months after Nepal PM Balen Shah stirred another controversy when he told Parliament, “After becoming prime minister, I came to know that not only has India encroached on Nepal’s land, but Nepal has also encroached on India’s land in multiple places.” While this statement became a major talking point, Nepal’s foreign ministry subsequently clarified that the PM was referring to technical cross-border occupations and said Kathmandu’s position on the disputed territories remained unchanged.

The India-Nepal border dispute acquired another angle after India and China agreed to reopen trade through Lipulekh. Nepal objected, maintaining that Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani were integral parts of its territory. Now, with the original papers untraceable, what does it mean for Nepal’s claims over Lipulekh, Kalapani and Limpiyadhura?

WHERE IS NEPAL’S ORIGINAL SUGAULI TREATY?

Speaking at Nepal’s House of Representatives, Foreign Minister Shisir Khanal acknowledged that the government could not say definitively whether it possessed the original treaty.

“The Government of Nepal does not have clear information on whether we possess the official treaty documents. There are records showing that some documents related to certain treaties are kept at the National Archives. But we do not have clear information as to whether those are the actual official treaties,” Khanal told Parliament, reported The Kathmandu Post.

Khanal said Nepal nevertheless possessed documents related to both the 1816 Sugauli Treaty and the 1950 Treaty of Peace and Friendship with India. The search for the document isn’t new.

When the Eminent Persons’ Group on Nepal-India Relations began discussing a review or replacement of the 1950 treaty in 2016, the Nepali side tried to locate its original copy and failed. The government eventually provided the Bhekh Bahadur Thapa-led committee with a second copy, reported news agency PTI.

The hunt subsequently widened. A parliamentary enquiry searched libraries, archives and repositories as well as the Department of Archaeology, Narayanhiti Palace Museum, Ministry of Law and Ministry of Foreign Affairs. It concluded that the originals of both the Sugauli Treaty and the 1950 Nepal-India treaty could not be located.

In 2019, then Nepalese Foreign Minister Pradeep Gyawali acknowledged the same uncertainty. “We have both treaties, but we have to forensically verify whether these copies are originals or not,” Gyawali said. “We are also trying to find historical documents and maps in India and the United Kingdom,” he said in 2019.

WHY A 210-YEAR-OLD TREATY STILL MATTERS

The Sugauli Treaty followed Nepal’s defeat in the Anglo-Nepal War of 1814-16, which marked the boundary between British India and the Hindu kingdom of Nepal. Signed in December 1815 and ratified in March 1816, it became the foundation for Nepal’s modern territorial boundaries.

For today’s dispute, Article 5 of the Treaty is crucial. It provided that Nepal renounced claims to territories lying west of the Kali River, effectively making the river its western boundary. But that produced a question that has survived for two centuries. Where exactly does Kali begin?

Nepal argues that the river originates at Limpiyadhura. On that interpretation, Limpiyadhura, Kalapani and Lipulekh lie east of the river and therefore inside Nepal.

India’s position is that Kali originates from springs below the Lipulekh region and points to administrative and revenue records to support its claim that Kalapani has historically been administered as part of Pithoragarh district of undivided Uttar Pradesh, now in Uttarakhand. Both sides have invoked British-era maps and records.

There is an additional historical complication. The treaty itself did not explicitly identify Limpiyadhura as the Kali’s source, and no mutually authenticated map defining that source is known to have accompanied it, The Kathmandu Post reported.

These complications make historical documents, maps and archival records central to the arguments both countries make.

WHEN OLI PUT LIPULEKH ON NEPAL’S MAP

The India-Nepal border dispute exploded spectacularly in 2020. India inaugurated an 80-km road connecting Uttarakhand with Lipulekh on the route to Kailash Mansarovar. Nepal protested, claiming the road passed through its territory. Oli’s government responded by unveiling a new political map incorporating Limpiyadhura, Lipulekh and Kalapani into Nepal. The map was even added to Nepal’s Constitution.

Parliament overwhelmingly approved a constitutional amendment incorporating the revised map into the country’s national emblem. India rejected the move, saying the “unilateral act is not based on historical facts and evidence” and calling the enlargement of Nepal’s territorial claims unacceptable.

The confrontation strained the relationship traditionally described through the language of roti-beti ties, an open border and deep cultural and economic connections.

Now, amid this mix of history and tensions, Kathmandu has acknowledged that it still cannot establish whether the original treaty papers underpinning the centuries-old boundary arrangement are actually in its possession.