Statement–Argument — Should State Electricity Boards conduct raids to check use of air-conditioners (ACs) during peak hours? Arguments: I) Yes; electricity is critical infrastructure, and conserving it at peak times protects grid stability and public services. II) No; enforcement should focus on connected-load violations and electricity theft, which are the real problems. Choose the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:Grid operators must manage peak demand to avoid outages. The question is whether raids targeting AC usage are justified, versus prioritizing checks on load violations and theft.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Peak-hour overloads can trigger brownouts and frequency dips.
• Demand-side measures include peak pricing, awareness, and targeted enforcement.
• Theft and unapproved load exacerbate stress and undermine fairness.

Concept / Approach:Argument I is strong: direct conservation during peaks can stabilize the grid and protect hospitals, water pumps, and transit. Argument II is also strong: focusing scarce enforcement resources on theft and illegal loads may yield larger, fairer gains. Because each presents a valid but distinct enforcement philosophy, either can be judged strong.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:Utilities commonly blend peak-management with anti-theft drives, confirming both approaches’ relevance.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:“Only I/Only II” dismisses the other valid approach; “Neither” ignores clear system needs.

Common Pitfalls:Treating conservation and anti-theft as mutually exclusive; both can be sequenced or combined.

Final Answer:If either I or II is strong.