In the context of British expansion in India, what was unique about the way the Indian states of Satara (1848), Jhansi (1853), and Nagpur (1854) passed into British control?

Introduction / Context:
During the nineteenth century, the British East India Company used a combination of war, diplomacy, and legal doctrines to extend its control over Indian territories. One controversial method of annexation was the Doctrine of Lapse, associated especially with Governor General Lord Dalhousie. Understanding how certain princely states such as Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur came under British rule helps students see how legal technicalities were used as political tools. This question focuses on what was unique about the way these three states passed into British hands.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• The states mentioned are Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur.
• The years of annexation are 1848, 1853, and 1854 respectively.
• Options include annexation under the Doctrine of Lapse, voluntary cession, purchase, and temporary military occupation.
• We assume knowledge of Dalhousie's policies and the broad pattern of British territorial expansion.

Concept / Approach:
The Doctrine of Lapse allowed the British to annex a princely state if its ruler died without a direct natural male heir and if the British refused to recognise an adopted successor. Lord Dalhousie applied this doctrine aggressively in the mid nineteenth century. Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur were all annexed on this basis, even though local rulers sometimes had adopted heirs or protested the decision. This created resentment and became one of the grievances that later fuelled the Revolt of 1857, especially in places like Jhansi. The other options such as voluntary treaties, purchase, or temporary occupation describe different methods of acquiring territory and do not match the distinctive pattern shared by these three states.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Identify the policy associated with Lord Dalhousie that allowed annexation when a ruler had no natural male heir. Step 2: Recognise this as the Doctrine of Lapse. Step 3: Recall that Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur were all taken over by the British using this doctrine in the years mentioned. Step 4: Compare this method with alternatives such as purchase, voluntary cession, or temporary occupation and see that they do not fit these three cases. Step 5: Conclude that the unique feature was annexation under the Doctrine of Lapse when rulers died without natural heirs.

Verification / Alternative check:
Standard accounts of Lord Dalhousie's rule in India list Satara, Jhansi, Nagpur, and other states such as Sambalpur and Awadh among those annexed through the Doctrine of Lapse or similar policies. The repeated mention of these examples in textbooks and exam guides confirms that they were not acquired by purchase or formal treaties after open battle, but through legal interpretation of succession rights. This consistent pattern supports the correctness of the Doctrine of Lapse explanation.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
The idea that these states were ceded voluntarily after military defeat is misleading, because the key justification used by the British was the absence of accepted natural heirs, not simply battlefield treaties. Purchase of a territory in return for large payments did occur in some colonial contexts but is not the standard description for Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur. Temporary occupation for military bases followed by return of territory also does not fit the historical record, since these states were fully annexed and integrated into British controlled regions. Therefore, options B, C, and D do not accurately describe what was unique about their annexation.

Common Pitfalls:
Students sometimes confuse different methods of British expansion and may assume that war or purchase was always involved. Another pitfall is to remember the Doctrine of Lapse in general but forget which specific states were annexed under it. Keeping a short list of key examples, including Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur, and linking them to Dalhousie's policy of annexation without natural heirs helps avoid these errors and strengthens understanding of the build up to the Revolt of 1857.

Final Answer:
Satara, Jhansi, and Nagpur passed into British control in a unique way because they were annexed under Lord Dalhousie's Doctrine of Lapse when rulers died without natural heirs.