Explanation: The Doctrine of Lapse was a significant policy introduced by the British East India Company in the 19th century to expand their control over India. This policy allowed the British to annex princely states if their rulers died without a natural heir, thereby preventing the inheritance of the throne by adopted heirs. The policy was a strategic move to consolidate British power and control over the Indian subcontinent.
Several princely states were annexed under this doctrine, including Sambalpur, Udaipur, and Jhansi. Sambalpur was annexed in 1849, Udaipur in 1852, and Jhansi in 1854. These annexations were a direct result of the Doctrine of Lapse, as the rulers of these states died without natural heirs, and the British refused to recognize adopted heirs.
However, Delhi was a special case. Delhi had already been under British control since the defeat of the Mughal Empire in the mid-19th century. The British had established their authority over Delhi after the Indian Rebellion of 1857, and it was not a princely state that could be annexed under the Doctrine of Lapse. Therefore, Delhi was not annexed under this doctrine.
Understanding the Doctrine of Lapse and its application is crucial for comprehending the broader context of British colonial policies in India. It highlights the strategic and often ruthless methods employed by the British to expand their control and influence over the Indian subcontinent. The annexation of princely states under this doctrine was a significant factor in the growing discontent among Indian rulers and the eventual rise of the Indian independence movement.
In summary, the correct answer is Delhi because it was already under British control and was not annexed under the Doctrine of Lapse. The other options—Sambalpur, Udaipur, and Jhansi—were all annexed under this policy, making them incorrect choices.