Why did India give away Berubari to Pakistan?

The transfer of the Berubari Union, a small territory in West Bengal, to Pakistan in the early years after independence is one of the lesser-known but significant episodes in the history of India’s border-making. The Berubari case not only involved sensitive questions of national integrity and territorial sovereignty but also led to a landmark legal interpretation of the Indian Constitution. To understand why India gave away Berubari to Pakistan, we must explore the historical, political, legal, and diplomatic contexts that surrounded the issue.

The roots of the Berubari controversy lie in the Partition of British India in 1947, which led to the creation of India and Pakistan. The boundary between the two new nations was drawn by Sir Cyril Radcliffe, a British lawyer with no prior experience in India, who was given just a few weeks to divide the provinces of Punjab and Bengal.

The Radcliffe Line, which was supposed to be the final word on borders, left many ambiguities. One such confusion arose in Bengal, particularly in the Malda district, where Berubari was located. Radcliffe awarded the entire Jalpaiguri district, including the Berubari Union No. 12, to India. However, in the narrative portion of the Radcliffe Award, there was a statement suggesting that a portion of this area would go to Pakistan to provide continuity to Pakistani territory.

This contradictory description sowed the seeds of future dispute between India and Pakistan over Berubari.

By the 1950s, tensions remained high over various border regions, and Berubari was one of them. In an effort to resolve such issues through diplomacy rather than conflict, Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistani Prime Minister Feroz Khan Noon entered into an agreement in 1958, famously known as the Nehru-Noon Agreement.

Under this agreement, it was decided that:

• India would retain the northern half of Berubari Union No. 12.
• The southern half would be ceded to Pakistan.
• In return, Pakistan agreed to transfer certain enclaves in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) to India.

The idea behind the agreement was to settle border disputes amicably and improve bilateral relations. Nehru believed that giving away part of Berubari was a small price for lasting peace and border stability. However, this move triggered domestic criticism and a constitutional crisis.

The Nehru government’s decision to give away Indian territory to Pakistan was soon challenged on constitutional grounds. Critics argued that no part of Indian territory could be ceded without amending the Constitution.

The government referred the matter to the Supreme Court under Article 143 of the Constitution, which allows the President to seek the Court’s opinion on constitutional questions.

In the landmark Berubari Union case (1960), the Supreme Court of India ruled that the Parliament must amend the Constitution before any Indian territory could be transferred to another country. According to the Court, the Preamble, read with Article 1 (which defines India’s territory), made it clear that the government could not give away any land by executive action or treaty alone.

As a result, the Indian Parliament had to pass the Ninth Amendment Act in 1960 to facilitate the transfer of the Berubari territory to Pakistan as agreed under the Nehru-Noon deal.

Although the legal and constitutional hurdles were cleared, actual implementation of the Berubari transfer was delayed for years. Public protests in West Bengal and local opposition, especially from people living in the affected areas, made the situation politically sensitive.

Moreover, India-Pakistan relations deteriorated sharply in the 1960s, with wars in 1965 and 1971. These tensions meant that the Berubari agreement was left unimplemented for decades.

It was only after the formation of Bangladesh in 1971, and subsequent agreements with the new government in Dhaka, that the issue found a more practical resolution. Some of the provisions of the original Nehru-Noon Agreement were eventually adjusted in later treaties with Bangladesh.

The Berubari case is significant not because of the size or value of the land involved, but because it raised important questions about how sovereign territory is defined and transferred in a democratic nation. It also highlighted the importance of legal clarity and constitutional procedures in foreign policy decisions.

For Jawaharlal Nehru, Berubari was a minor sacrifice for the greater good of Indo-Pak peace. But for many Indians, especially those in West Bengal, it felt like a loss of land and identity. The case also set a precedent in constitutional law by clearly defining that any transfer of Indian territory requires a constitutional amendment, not just a diplomatic agreement.

The Berubari case is a fascinating blend of diplomacy, law, and nation-building in post-independence India. It showed how even small territorial issues could carry deep constitutional and emotional weight. While India did give away part of Berubari to Pakistan as part of a peace-building effort, the controversy surrounding it helped strengthen India’s constitutional procedures and clarified the limits of executive power in foreign affairs.

Ultimately, Berubari became a symbol not only of the complexities of partition but also of the democratic process through which a young republic sought to resolve international disputes.