I is strong because it cares for consumers and manufactures both. II is weak. Because it wrongly assumes that there is no way of hallmarking of gold without damaging its utility.

I is strong because it advocates for the interests of farmer and industries, the backbone of our country. II is weak due to the wording ''at all costs''.

I does not answer how the real prosperity of nation will come thought the move. Hence I is weak. II is also weak because it does not say how the free railway pass will be harmful to students.

I is strong on humanitarian ground. II is also strong because this is the ultimate step to restrict the mob.

I Only I is strong. Quality of a doctor must not be neglected. II is not strong because it adds nothing to the statement.

Basic purpose of keeping a mobile phone is to facilitate mobile holders to be in touch whit the outside would. This purpose will not be affected even after the implementation of the move. Hence , I is weak. II is ambiguous.

Both communal harmony and furthering of social customs are desirable.

Any private services can't be banned only because there are charges against manipulation which can be rectified by legal actions. Hence I weak. II is also weak because of the word 'always'.

I is strong : it reveals the very purpose of registration of marriages. II is an absurd argument.

I is weak because it does not hit at the main question ___''rearing endangered species''. II is weak because it assumes that rearing musk deer will diminish their number. Experience, on the other hand, tells us that rearing of a species for commercial purposes only adds to its number.