evidence: Sir Creek is a river boundary dispute, which impacts the delineation of maritime boundaries. It stems from a compromise between the government of Sindh in British India and the Kutch Darbar on boundary delimitation over the Kori Creek, which originally divided the two principalities in 1908, and lies east of the Sir Creek. [...] Sir Creek is a non-navigable river under international law. It is tidal and is only navigable for a few hours during high tide. The thalweg principle is hence inapplicable to Sir Creek. Pakistan’s position, that the boundary is on the eastern bank due to historical title, seems accurate. Under the established principle of uti possidetis, both Pakistan and India inherited the original borders of their predecessor state and the delimitations effected by them. In this regard, Resolution 1192 classifies that the B-44 map is authoritative and expressly rejects the thalweg principle. [...] Interestingly, recent evidence suggests that Sir Creek is meandering eastward through accretion. If so, the middle of the river might have or eventually will move east of the eastern bank of the river as it was located in 1914 or at the time of Independence. Hence, India would actually lose territory to Pakistan if the median line principle coupled with accretion applied. The biggest casualty of not delimiting Sir Creek is the incarceration of thousands of innocent fishermen from the border region who are routinely arrested and their boats confiscated.