Statement — The police department is under a cloud after revelations that at least two senior officers are suspected of involvement in illegal sale of a large quantity of weapons from the state police armory. Courses of Action — I. Order a thorough investigation by the State Government to identify all individuals involved in the illegal sale. II. Place the state police armory under Central Government control.
-
Aif only I follows
-
Bif only II follows
-
Cif either I or II follows
-
Dif neither I nor II follows
-
Eif both I and II follow
Answer
Correct Answer: if only I follows
Explanation
Introduction / Context:The alleged diversion of weapons from a state armory is serious and needs accountability. However, remedies must be targeted and proportionate to the allegation rather than restructuring federal control without basis.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Incident: suspected illegal weapon sales involving senior officers.
- COA I: launch an independent, thorough probe; identify culpability; enforce penalties; tighten controls.
- COA II: shift armory control to the Centre (structural centralization).
Concept / Approach:COA I directly addresses fact-finding and accountability, the necessary first step. COA II presumes systemic failure requiring federal takeover—an overreach absent evidence; policing is a state subject, and central control neither follows from nor is needed to investigate one armory’s breach.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Establish facts and culpability (I).2) Recommend control/process reforms based on findings.3) Reject blanket centralization (II) as premature.Verification / Alternative check:Post-investigation, targeted control enhancements (audits, digital inventory, surveillance) may suffice; centralization is not implied by the statement itself.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only II/Either/Both: assumes remedy without diagnosis.Neither: ignores the obvious due-process step.Common Pitfalls:Letting outrage drive structural remedies before establishing facts.
Final Answer:Only I follows.