Statement:\nThe RBI Governor has slashed the Cash Reserve Ratio (CRR) by 200 basis points—from 7.50% to 5.50%.\n\nConclusions:\nI. This measure will kickstart the sluggish economy.\nII. The lendable resources of the banking sector will increase to some extent.

Introduction / Context:
CRR is the fraction of deposits that banks must keep with the central bank. A reduction frees up a portion of previously impounded funds. We must identify which conclusions are necessarily implied by the statement about a CRR cut, not by general economic expectations or wishful thinking.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• CRR reduced by 200 basis points (2 percentage points).
• No other policy changes are mentioned.
• No explicit claim is made about GDP growth or aggregate demand response.

Concept / Approach:
A lower CRR mechanically increases banks’ deployable liquidity—this is definitional, so Conclusion II follows. Whether that in turn “kickstarts” a sluggish economy (Conclusion I) depends on credit demand, risk appetite, transmission, and broader macro conditions; it is plausible but not guaranteed by the text, so I does not necessarily follow.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) CRR↓ → required reserves↓ → funds released to banks → lendable resources↑ → II follows.2) Real activity response (I) is contingent and not stated → I does not follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
Suppose banks remain risk-averse or borrowers are weak; the economy may not “kickstart,” yet the liquidity arithmetic of a CRR cut still holds. Hence II is necessary, I is not.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Both” over-commits to a macro outcome. “Either” implies one or the other must hold; but the mechanical effect (II) does hold. “Neither” ignores the definitional impact of CRR.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing a transmission mechanism (possible) with a logical entailment (certain).

Final Answer:
If only conclusion II follows.