**8. Geomorphic evidences controlling fluvial network**

We identified various geomorphic features associated with active movement along F1 such as block tilting, fault scarps, co-seismic uplift and drainage offset, are well characterized by [57]. At a place the Mesozoic sandstone ridded over Quaternary deposits, resulted ~2 m high active fault scarp (**Figure 6A**–**E**). The Mesozoic strata are tilted by 8° southward. We identified secondary surface deformation ~10 km along the strike of the F2 (**Figure 6A**). The co-seismic movement has developed tensional fractures along the strike of F2 (**Figure 6D**–**E**). The north dipping tensional fractures near F2 reflect "en echelon" pattern having step-overs with strikeslip component; probably developed during the northward movement of the hanging wall followed by surface bending (**Figure 6D** and **E**) [23].

Further Kothyari et al. [23] documented remarkable geomorphic features such as (a) E-W trending fault across gently folded Mesozoic strata, (b) steeply dipping strata with south facing active fault scarp at Deshalpar, (c) wide tensional in E-W direction, (d) highly fractured and sheared litho-units within faulted blocks, (e) subsidence of ground, and drainage offset along the structures (**Figure 6F**). The tectonic movement in this region resulted changes in surface elevation by forming approximately 9 m high fault scarp (**Figure 6G**). A significant gradient change in the valley floor causes development of 3 m high knickpoint (**Figure 6H**). The litho-units are tightly folded within the fault zone. The southern limb of the fold is steeply (~75°) dipping towards south. These steeply dipping beds are characterized by presence of slickensides parallel to the strike direction (E-W) of the F5 (**Figure 6I**). Kothyari et al. [23] believe that these features are results of middle to late Holocene tectonic reactivation of GF. Furthermore, the significant amount of changes have been observed within the hydrological network between 8 to 4 ka [23]. The north flowing Karaswali River takes 90<sup>o</sup> turn and flows in west direction, parallel to GF (F4). East–west offsetting of the two rivers is also observed south of the Gedi village (**Figure 6F**).

Conventionally the hypsometric integrals reveal complex interactions between erosion and tectonics [39, 52, 53]. Hypsometric integrals are thought to be affected by basin parameters such as geometry, area and rapid lowering of basin elevations [53, 54]. The hypsometric integral of each basin has been computed based on drainage area and basin geometry. Hypsometric integrals are thought to be affected by basin parameters such as geometry, area and rapid lowering of basin elevations [53, 54]. The HI of each basin has been computed based on drainage area and basin geometry. However, we deployed conventional statistical technique for the entire basin as well as the computation is implemented to individual squire where high and low values can be obtained together. The contour map shows spatial distribution of high and low values, imply that the WH experiencing rapid changes in elevation and incision; owing to tectonic and climatic variations [23]. The higher values of HI clustered around the uplifted regions however the lower values representing low lying areas (**Figure 2C**). In the analysis of HI, it is considered whether the curve is convex in its upper portion, convex to concave, or convex in the lower portion. The HI curves of all basins are given in **Figure 4**. It is assumed that if part of the hypsometric integral is convex in the lower portion, it could be

In present study 10 north flowing and 17 south flowing rivers of WH were analyzed in order to estimate river offset and tectonic control by the faults that cut across the area (**Figure 2A, B**). The estimated values of offset along F2 ranges between 1.1 and 3.9 km, along F3, 0.49–1.3 km, along F4 0.63–4.3 km, along F5 0.8–1.8 km, along F6 0.79–3.1 km, along F7 0.3–0.9 km, along F8 0.4–1 km, along F9 0.8–0.9 km, and along 10 the offset ranges between 0.3 and 2.2 km respectively (**Figure 2D**). The stream offset along the F2–10 is comparatively less westward. However, the computed values of offset ratio of about 0.34 km for F2, 0.11 km for F3, 0.14 km for F4, 0.09 km for F5, 0.07 km for F6, 0.08 km for F7, 0.06 km for F8, 0.14 km for F9 and 0.31 km

We identified various geomorphic features associated with active movement along F1 such as block tilting, fault scarps, co-seismic uplift and drainage offset, are well characterized by [57]. At a place the Mesozoic sandstone ridded over Quaternary deposits, resulted ~2 m high active fault scarp (**Figure 6A**–**E**). The Mesozoic strata are tilted by 8° southward. We identified secondary surface deformation ~10 km along the strike of the F2 (**Figure 6A**). The co-seismic movement has developed tensional fractures along the strike of F2 (**Figure 6D**–**E**). The north dipping tensional fractures near F2 reflect "en echelon" pattern having step-overs with strikeslip component; probably developed during the northward movement of the hanging wall

Further Kothyari et al. [23] documented remarkable geomorphic features such as (a) E-W trending fault across gently folded Mesozoic strata, (b) steeply dipping strata with south facing active fault scarp at Deshalpar, (c) wide tensional in E-W direction, (d) highly fractured and sheared litho-units within faulted blocks, (e) subsidence of ground, and drainage offset

associated with uplift along a fault or associated with recent folding.

**8. Geomorphic evidences controlling fluvial network**

followed by surface bending (**Figure 6D** and **E**) [23].

for F10 respectively (**Table 2**).

144 Tectonics - Problems of Regional Settings

**Figure 6.** (A) Detailed map showing major tectonic features observed in the F2 zone (inset; DEM of growing ridge showing ground uplift (~1.5 m) near the fault zone (modified after [57]); (B and C) fault scarp; (D and E) development of E-W oriented tensional cracks within the fault zone. These tensional cracks are displaced by small scale strike slip faults. (F) Map shows locations of ground deformation observed along the trace of F4. Inset shows development of tensional fractures within the tertiary sandstone bed (modified after [23]); (G) development of ~9 m high fault scarp near Deshalpar, (H) lateral spreading of ground east of Deshalpar, and 3 m waterfall was developed along the F3, (I) well developed slickensides are visible parallel to strike of F4. *The drainage map of* **A** and **F** *are generated using georeference SOI topographic map in Global mapper 18 software and for final editing we used Surfer 14 software. The inset DEM of the area has been generated with the help of reconnaissance Real Time Kinematic (RTK) survey. The DEM has been generated in Surfer Software.*
