Nepal's Foreign Minister Shishir Khanal has revealed that the government does not have confirmed information about the whereabouts or availability of the original copy of the 1816 Sugauli Treaty. The revelation has attracted attention because the historic agreement is closely connected with the modern boundary between Nepal and British India.
The issue has emerged at a time when India and Nepal continue to have differences over the areas of Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani. Nepal has maintained claims over these areas, while India has rejected those claims and maintained its position regarding the boundary.
The Sugauli Treaty followed the Anglo Nepalese War of 1814 to 1816. It was signed in December 1815 and subsequently ratified in March 1816. The agreement established important territorial arrangements between the Kingdom of Nepal and the British East India Company, including the Kali River as the western boundary reference.
The current controversy concerns the original document itself. According to reports, a parliamentary committee in Nepal searched various government archives, ministries and museums but could not establish whether the original treaty copy remains in the country's possession. Foreign Minister Khanal told Parliament that records connected with the treaty exist, but the government cannot confirm whether those records represent the original treaty document.
The uncertainty has gained importance because the Sugauli Treaty is frequently cited in discussions concerning the India Nepal boundary. Nepal's interpretation of the treaty has been used in support of its claims over the disputed western territories.
Nepal argues that the Kali River originates at Limpiyadhura. Based on that interpretation, Kathmandu considers Limpiyadhura, Kalapani and Lipulekh to lie east of the river and therefore within Nepalese territory.
India disputes this interpretation. India's position has been that the Kali River originates from springs below the Lipulekh region. India has also referred to historical administrative records and other evidence in support of its position concerning Kalapani.
The border disagreement became particularly prominent in 2020 after India inaugurated a road connecting the Lipulekh area. Nepal objected to the development and subsequently issued a revised political map that included Lipulekh, Limpiyadhura and Kalapani within its territory. India rejected Nepal's claims.
The latest development involving the treaty document has therefore emerged against an already sensitive diplomatic background. Nepal has recently raised objections to India and China's reported plans to resume trade through the Lipulekh area, adding to the significance of the border issue.
The question of the original Sugauli Treaty is also connected to broader concerns about the preservation of historical records. The treaty is more than two centuries old, and copies or related archival records may exist in different institutions and countries. The absence of a confirmed original copy in Nepal does not by itself settle the territorial dispute.
India and Nepal have historically maintained close political, economic and cultural ties despite disagreements over certain sections of their common border. Both countries have mechanisms for discussing boundary-related matters through diplomatic channels.
India has also indicated that questions concerning the original Sugauli Treaty can be discussed through established bilateral mechanisms. This could provide an avenue for the two countries to examine historical records and their respective interpretations of the treaty.
For now, Nepal's admission that it cannot confirm the location or status of the original 1816 document has generated considerable discussion. However, the development should not be interpreted as independently determining ownership of the disputed territories.
The India Nepal border issue remains a complex matter involving historical treaties, maps, administrative records and differing interpretations of the Kali River's source. Any lasting solution is likely to require continued diplomatic engagement and examination of historical and contemporary evidence by both sides.
The latest revelation has nevertheless brought renewed attention to the importance of the Sugauli Treaty and the role of historical documents in the continuing India Nepal border debate.