Consider the famous proverb based statement and the information about Sujatha. Treat the statements as logically true and then decide which conclusion definitely follows. Statement 1: All that glitters is not gold. (This means that many glittering things are not gold.) Statement 2: Sujatha wears a gold ornament. Conclusions: I. The gold ornament worn by Sujatha glitters. II. The gold ornament worn by Sujatha does not glitter.

Introduction / Context:
This question combines a proverb like statement with a specific factual statement about a person. The proverb All that glitters is not gold is often misread or over interpreted. In logical reasoning, we must translate it carefully and then see whether it gives any information about gold objects themselves. The goal is to decide whether we can say anything definite about the glittering property of the ornament worn by Sujatha.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- Statement 1: All that glitters is not gold. Interpreted in everyday reasoning, this means that there are glittering objects that are not gold and that glittering appearance alone does not guarantee that something is gold. - Statement 2: Sujatha wears a gold ornament. - Nothing is said about whether gold ornaments in general glitter or do not glitter. - Conclusions I and II make opposite claims about the ornament worn by Sujatha.

Concept / Approach:
The proverb focuses on the idea that if something glitters, it may still not be gold. It warns us not to judge quality by appearance. It does not state a complete logical rule relating gold and glitter. In particular, it does not say that nothing that glitters can be gold or that all gold must or must not glitter. Therefore, we must be very cautious when trying to draw conclusions about a specific gold ornament based on this proverb like statement.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Translate Statement 1 into logical language. The intended meaning is that glittering is not a reliable test for gold. There exist glittering things that are not gold. It is not a strict universal statement about all glittering objects being non gold. Step 2: From Statement 2 we know that Sujatha wears an ornament that is made of gold. However, nothing in either statement tells us whether gold ornaments glitter or not. Step 3: Check Conclusion I: the ornament worn by Sujatha glitters. This may be true in real life, but the given statements do not assert it. The fact that some glittering things are not gold says nothing about whether gold things glitter. Therefore, Conclusion I is not logically forced. Step 4: Check Conclusion II: the ornament worn by Sujatha does not glitter. This is again a claim without any support in the statements. The proverb does not say that gold objects never glitter. It only warns that glitter is not proof of gold. Step 5: Because we cannot deduce either glittering or non glittering behaviour of the ornament from the given information, neither conclusion is justified.

Verification / Alternative check:
Imagine two possible worlds. In the first world, Sujatha's gold ornament glittered because of polished metal and embedded stones. In the second world, the same ornament was dull or covered and did not glitter. In both worlds the proverb like statement All that glitters is not gold can still be true, because in both worlds there are other glittering objects, such as imitation jewellery, that are not gold. This shows that the status of the proverb does not determine whether Sujatha's ornament glitters. Hence neither conclusion can be forced from the statements.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- Options that select Conclusion I or Conclusion II assume extra information about gold ornaments that is not given. - The option that selects both conclusions is impossible, because they contradict each other and there is no support for either one. - The option that claims the answer cannot be determined is close to the correct intuition, but in this exam style framing, the precise logical result is that neither conclusion follows from the statements.

Common Pitfalls:
A major pitfall is to misread the proverb as All that glitters is never gold, which would be a very different and much stronger statement. Another mistake is to assume that gold always glitters and to project this real world belief into the logical analysis. In reasoning questions, we must ignore outside knowledge and stick only to what the statements say and what they clearly imply.

Final Answer:
Therefore, neither conclusion can be logically drawn from the given statements, so the correct answer is Neither Conclusion I nor Conclusion II follows.