Why the sepoys were unable to free india from the british

At first, the sepoys successfully took control of a number of Indian cities including Delhi, but their lack of organization and lack of widespread support in the face of the British colonial system was not enough to retain control of India and drive out the colonizers. The sepoys did not have a clear leader or a command structure. Instead, they fought independently to defend the areas they controlled from the British. They also struggled to gain widespread support from Indians because of religious division. For example, when one of the leaders of the rebellion, a Muslim named Bahadur Shah Zafar declared himself Emperor of India, Sikhs from the Punjab region of India who had fought against Islamic rule under the Mughals refused to support him. In addition, the sepoys were only able to get support from some regional princes. Others, who had comfortable positions under British rule, supported the East India Company. Eventually, British reinforcements arrived with new supplies and weapons like siege guns needed to defeat the sepoys encamped in cities. The last rebels were defeated in Gwalior on June 20, 1858 and the warring parties signed a peace treaty on July 8, 1858 ending the war

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.