Statement: The distance of 900 km by road between Bombay and Jafra will be…

In Statement–Conclusion reasoning, a conclusion ‘follows’ only when it is a definite inference drawn strictly from what the statement itself says — without stretching one specific fact into a general rule and without assuming outside information. A conclusion that echoes the statement's own stated point follows; one that generalizes a single instance into a universal law does not.

Here the statement reports figures for one specific route, Bombay to Jafra, and states that switching from road to sea on this route saves Rs. 7.92 crores in fuel every year.

• Conclusion I claims transportation by sea is cheaper than by road in general. The statement gives fuel-cost figures for this one route only and never compares the two modes' total costs elsewhere, so generalizing to “sea is cheaper than road” everywhere overreaches what is given.

• Conclusion II states that fuel must be saved to the greatest extent. The entire statement is built around the fuel saving achieved by the route change, so treating fuel conservation as the priority is a direct reading of what the statement itself emphasizes, not an added assumption.

Independently checking: nothing in the statement measures or compares total transport cost between the two modes beyond fuel, so a blanket cheaper-by-sea claim cannot be certified from this data; the fuel-saving emphasis, however, is exactly what the statement states, so only conclusion II follows from it.