Who among the following finally removed the Maratha Peshwa from his position,captured his territories and sent him off to a distant place ?

1. Structure of the Maratha Confederacy (basic)

To understand the Maratha Confederacy, we must first look at its roots. Originally, the Maratha state was a centralized monarchy established by Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, who was assisted by a council of eight ministers known as the Ashta Pradhan. One of these ministers was the Peshwa (the Prime Minister). However, after the death of Shahu (Shivaji’s grandson), the nature of Maratha power underwent a massive shift. The office of the Peshwa became hereditary and supreme under the leadership of Balaji Vishwanath (1713–1720), effectively turning the Chhatrapati into a titular figurehead while the Peshwa became the de facto ruler of the Maratha Empire History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.235.

As the Marathas expanded their influence across India, it became difficult to manage such a vast territory from a single center like Pune. This led to the emergence of the Maratha Confederacy—a loose alliance of powerful military commanders who were granted the right to collect taxes (Chauth and Sardeshmukhi) in specific regions. While they all theoretically owed allegiance to the Peshwa as their head, these chiefs operated as virtually independent rulers in their respective domains. By the mid-18th century, the Confederacy was composed of five primary families:

Family/House	Seat of Power (Region)
The Peshwa	Pune (The nominal head of the Confederacy)
Scindia (Sindhia)	Gwalior
Holkar	Indore
Gaikwar (Gaekwad)	Baroda
Bhonsle	Nagpur

This structure was a double-edged sword. On one hand, it allowed the Marathas to strike in multiple directions simultaneously—reaching as far as Delhi, Orissa, and Bengal History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.232. On the other hand, the lack of a strong central authority often led to internal rivalries. These chiefs were frequently at odds with one another, and their cooperation usually depended on the personal charisma and strength of the reigning Peshwa. When the Peshwa's authority weakened, the Confederacy functioned more like a collection of competing states than a unified empire Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.107.

Sources: History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.235; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.232; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.107

2. British Expansionist Tools: Ring Fence and Subsidiary Alliance (basic)

To understand how the British transitioned from a trading company to the masters of India, we must look at the clever diplomatic and military traps they set. In the late 18th century, the British were wary of the high costs of direct warfare. Instead, they developed two primary strategic tools to expand their influence: the Ring Fence policy and the Subsidiary Alliance. These were not just military treaties; they were political 'checkmates' that drained the resources of Indian states while making the British the supreme power.

The first stage was the Policy of Ring Fence, introduced by Warren Hastings. Initially, the Company was not strong enough to conquer all of India, so it sought to protect its own territories (like Bengal) by creating a 'buffer' of friendly states around them. For example, they defended the state of Awadh not out of kindness, but to ensure that the Marathas or Afghans would have to fight through Awadh before reaching British borders History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.280. The Company would help these buffer states defend themselves, ensuring the war was fought on someone else's soil and, ideally, with someone else's money.

As British ambitions grew, Lord Wellesley (Governor-General from 1798–1805) evolved this into the much more aggressive Subsidiary Alliance. Under this system, an Indian ruler didn't just get a 'buffer'; they effectively traded their independence for British 'protection' Modern India, Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.), The British Conquest of India, p.76. While it looked like a security pact on the surface, it was a system designed to dismantle the sovereignty of Indian states from within.

Feature	Ring Fence (Warren Hastings)	Subsidiary Alliance (Lord Wellesley)
Primary Goal	Defensive: Create 'buffer states' to protect Company borders.	Expansionist: Subordinate Indian states and remove rivals.
Sovereignty	The state remained mostly independent in its internal/foreign affairs.	The state lost control over foreign policy and external relations.
Key Terms	Mutual defense against specific common enemies.	Stationing British troops permanently; accepting a British Resident Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Expansion and Consolidation, p.120.

The terms of a Subsidiary Alliance were particularly restrictive. A ruler had to: (1) Accept a permanent British armed contingent in their territory; (2) Pay for the maintenance of that army (often by surrendering part of their territory); (3) Accept a British Resident at their court—who eventually became the real power behind the throne; and (4) Agree not to employ any other Europeans or negotiate with any other Indian ruler without British permission THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.), REBELS AND THE RAJ, p.266. This effectively turned the Indian ruler into a protected 'subsidiary' of the British.

Sources: History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.280; Modern India, Bipin Chandra, History class XII (NCERT 1982 ed.), The British Conquest of India, p.76; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.120; THEMES IN INDIAN HISTORY PART III, History CLASS XII (NCERT 2025 ed.), REBELS AND THE RAJ, p.266

3. Early Anglo-Maratha Relations: 1st and 2nd Wars (intermediate)

The relationship between the British East India Company and the Maratha Confederacy was defined by a shift from mutual respect to British dominance. The Marathas were not a single unified kingdom but a loose confederacy of five powerful houses: the Peshwa (Pune), Scindia (Gwalior), Holkar (Indore), Bhonsle (Nagpur), and Gaekwad (Baroda). The British exploited internal dissensions within these houses to establish their supremacy.

The First Anglo-Maratha War (1775–1782) was triggered by a succession dispute in Pune. Raghunath Rao, seeking the Peshwaship, sought British help, which led to a prolonged conflict. This war concluded with the Treaty of Salbai (1782), a landmark diplomatic victory for Warren Hastings. Under this treaty, the British retained Salsette but restored other conquered territories to the Marathas Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.103. Crucially, it established a 20-year peace, allowing the British to concentrate on defeating Tipu Sultan of Mysore while the Marathas remained neutral allies History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.281.

The Second Anglo-Maratha War (1803–1805) arose from the chaos following the death of the visionary statesman Nana Phadnavis in 1800 History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board), The Marathas, p.234. The weak Peshwa, Baji Rao II, was defeated by the Holkars and fled to British protection. He signed the Treaty of Bassein (1802), which was a Subsidiary Alliance forced upon him by Lord Wellesley Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.134. This treaty was seen as a national insult by other Maratha chiefs, leading to war. Despite their bravery, the divided Maratha leaders like Scindia and Bhonsle were defeated individually, forcing them to cede vast territories and accept British residents at their courts.

Feature	First Anglo-Maratha War	Second Anglo-Maratha War
Key Treaty	Treaty of Salbai (1782)	Treaty of Bassein (1802)
British Governor	Warren Hastings	Lord Wellesley
Primary Outcome	Status quo; 20 years of peace.	Marathas lose independence; Subsidiary Alliance.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.103; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board), Early Resistance to British Rule, p.281; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board), The Marathas, p.234; Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.134

4. Adjacent Challenge: The Pindari Menace (intermediate)

To understand the Third Anglo-Maratha War, one must first understand the Pindaris. Often mischaracterized as mere bandits, the Pindaris were actually a diverse group of mercenary horsemen—comprising many castes and religions—who served as un-salaried auxiliaries to the Maratha armies Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.106. Their "pay" was the right to plunder the enemy during wartime. However, as the British crippled Maratha power during the early 19th century, these thousands of professional soldiers found themselves unemployed. Without a state to serve or a salary to earn, they turned into a "menace," organized into large predatory bands that raided Central India, including British-protected territories.

When Lord Hastings (Francis Rawdon-Hastings) became Governor-General in 1813, he arrived with a firm imperialistic design to establish British paramountcy across India Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.106. He viewed the Pindari raids not just as a law-and-order problem, but as a direct challenge to British authority. Moreover, the Charter Act of 1813 had ended the East India Company's monopoly on Indian trade, creating a desperate need for a stable, peaceful interior where British goods could be sold without the risk of being looted Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, Chapter 5, p.106.

In 1817, Hastings mobilized a massive force to surround and exterminate the Pindari strongholds. He accused the Maratha chiefs—specifically the Peshwa and Sindhia—of secretly harboring and encouraging these raiders. This aggressive military encirclement forced the Maratha leaders into a corner; they saw the suppression of the Pindaris as a precursor to the final destruction of their own sovereignty Bipin Chandra, Modern India, Chapter 4, p.81. This tension directly ignited the Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818), which ended with the total dissolution of the Maratha Confederacy and the abolition of the office of the Peshwa.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.106; Modern India (Bipin Chandra), Expansion Under Lord Hastings, p.81

5. The Policy of 'Paramountcy' under Lord Hastings (intermediate)

When Lord Hastings (also known as the Marquess of Hastings) arrived as Governor-General in 1813, he ushered in a decisive shift in British strategy known as the Policy of 'Paramountcy'. Unlike earlier policies that often sought to maintain a 'balance of power' or use buffer states, Hastings claimed that the authority of the British East India Company was supreme or paramount in India. This meant the British now viewed themselves as the undisputed masters of the subcontinent, asserting that their interest was superior to that of any Indian state. Consequently, the Company claimed the right to annex or threaten to annex any Indian kingdom if it perceived a threat to its interests Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.106.

This aggressive stance was driven by both economic and security concerns. The Charter Act of 1813 had ended the Company’s monopoly on trade with India, forcing the Company to expand its territorial control to secure new markets for British goods. At the same time, the British were troubled by the Pindaris—bands of irregular horsemen and mercenaries who plundered Central India. Hastings used the suppression of the Pindaris as a justification to move against the Marathas, whom he accused of sheltering these raiders. This led to the Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818), where Hastings effectively dissolved the Maratha Confederacy and abolished the office of the Peshwa, incorporating their lands into the Bombay Presidency Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.107.

The policy also extended to India's borders. The Anglo-Nepalese War (1814–1816) is a prime example of Paramountcy in action. After the Gorkhas attempted to expand into British-controlled territories like Butwal, Hastings launched a campaign that ended with the Treaty of Sagauli (1816). Under this treaty, Nepal was forced to accept a British Resident, cede strategic territories like Garhwal and Kumaon, and withdraw from Sikkim Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India, p.126. By the time Hastings left office in 1823, the map of India had been fundamentally redrawn, with the British no longer acting as one of many regional players, but as the central sovereign power.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.106-107; A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.126; A Brief History of Modern India, Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.135

6. The Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817-1818) (exam-level)

The Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818) represents the final, decisive chapter in the struggle for supremacy in India. By the early 19th century, the Maratha Confederacy was a shadow of its former self, crippled by internal feuds and the restrictive Subsidiary Alliance system. The spark for the final conflict was twofold: the British campaign against the Pindaris (irregular horsemen who operated from Maratha territories) which the Marathas saw as an infringement on their sovereignty, and the growing resentment of Peshwa Baji Rao II towards British interference in his court Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.134. Matters came to a head when Gangadhar Sastri, the minister of the Gaikwar of Baroda, was murdered by Trimbakji, a favorite of the Peshwa. When the British Resident, Mountstuart Elphinstone, demanded Trimbakji’s arrest, the Peshwa’s subsequent defiance led to the formal dissolution of the Maratha confederacy History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.234.

Under the aggressive leadership of Lord Hastings (the Governor-General), the British launched a massive pincer movement. The Peshwa attacked the British Residency at Poona but was defeated at the Battle of Khirki. Simultaneously, other Maratha chiefs like Bhonsle and Holkar were defeated at Sitabuldi and Mahidpur respectively. The war concluded with a complete British victory, marking the end of the Maratha Empire as a political entity. Unlike previous wars that ended in treaties of alliance, this war ended in annexation and total displacement.

The aftermath of the war changed the map of India. The British took the radical step of abolishing the office of the Peshwa entirely. Baji Rao II was pensioned off and sent to Bithur (near Kanpur), far away from his power base in Maharashtra, where he lived as a British retainer Modern India, Bipin Chandra, NCERT (1982 ed.), Chapter 4, p. 81. Most of the Peshwa's territories were incorporated into the Bombay Presidency. To soothe Maratha pride, a small state called Satara was carved out and given to a descendant of Shivaji, though it remained strictly under British paramountcy.

Aspect	Outcome of the Third Anglo-Maratha War
Political Status	The Maratha Confederacy was formally dissolved.
The Peshwaship	The office was abolished; the Peshwa was exiled to Bithur on a pension.
Territorial Change	Creation of the Bombay Presidency; Satara created as a princely state.
British Position	The British became the undisputed paramount power in India.

Sources: Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.134; History, class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.234; Modern India, Bipin Chandra, NCERT (1982 ed.), Chapter 4: The British Conquest of India, p.81

7. Dissolution of the Peshwaship and Aftermath (exam-level)

The final dissolution of the Peshwaship was the definitive moment when the British East India Company transitioned from a major power in India to the paramount sovereign. By the early 19th century, the Maratha Confederacy—a loose alliance of chiefs including the Scindias, Holkars, and Bhonsles—had become internally fractured. The Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818), fought during the tenure of Governor-General Lord Hastings, provided the British with the opportunity to dismantle this structure entirely. Rajiv Ahir, A Brief History of Modern India (2019 ed.), Chapter 5, p.107.

The conflict was sparked by Peshwa Baji Rao II’s resentment of British interference, particularly the Treaty of Poona (1817) which forced him to renounce his claim as head of the Maratha Confederacy. After suffering defeats at Khirki and Ashta, Baji Rao II fled but eventually surrendered to the British Resident at Poona, Mountstuart Elphinstone, in June 1818. History class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.234. The British response was a masterstroke of political engineering: they did not just defeat the Peshwa; they abolished the office of the Peshwaship itself to ensure no central Maratha authority could ever rise again.

The aftermath of the war saw a complete reorganization of Western India:

• Exile and Pension: Baji Rao II was removed from the Deccan and sent to Bithur (near Kanpur) to live as a British retainer on a fixed annual pension. He remained there until his death in 1851. History class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.235.
• Creation of Satara: To appease Maratha national sentiment and honor the legacy of Shivaji, the British carved out a small principality at Satara. They placed Pratap Singh, a direct descendant of Shivaji, on the throne as a symbolic, albeit powerless, ruler.
• Administrative Integration: The vast territories previously held by the Peshwa were formally incorporated into the British Bombay Presidency, with Elphinstone serving as its Governor.

Sources: A Brief History of Modern India (Spectrum), Expansion and Consolidation of British Power in India, p.107; History class XI (Tamilnadu state board 2024 ed.), The Marathas, p.234-235

8. Solving the Original PYQ (exam-level)

Now that you have mastered the timeline of the British conquest, you can see how the Third Anglo-Maratha War (1817–1818) served as the definitive conclusion to Maratha power. While earlier treaties had weakened the Maratha Confederacy, it was this final confrontation that led to the total dissolution of the office of the Peshwa. This question tests your ability to link a specific administrative action—the total abolition of a title and the physical deportation of a ruler—to the correct Governor-General's tenure. It brings together your knowledge of the Subsidiary Alliance aftermath and the eventual establishment of British paramountcy.

To arrive at the correct answer, you must recall that Lord Hastings (who served as Governor-General from 1813 to 1823) led the campaign that finally broke the Maratha resistance. Following the defeat of Baji Rao II at the Battle of Khirki and his subsequent surrender in 1818, Hastings took the decisive step of capturing the Peshwa's territories for the British Bombay Presidency. As noted in Modern India by Bipin Chandra and Spectrum's A Brief History of Modern India, the Peshwa was then sent off to Bithur (near Kanpur) to live as a pensioner. Thus, (D) Hastings is the correct figure responsible for this finality.

UPSC often uses chronological traps to test your precision. Wellesley is a common distractor because he fought the Second Anglo-Maratha War and forced the Treaty of Bassein, but he subordinated the Peshwa rather than removing him entirely. Cornwallis is largely associated with the Permanent Settlement and Mysore, predating the Maratha collapse. Finally, Dalhousie is a trap for students who associate all annexations with him; however, he operated via the Doctrine of Lapse much later (1848–1856), long after the Peshwaship had already been abolished by Hastings.