Dismissing four petitions challenging the collection of fine in cars when the drivers were found without a mask, the Delhi high court said it is mandatory to wear a mask in a private car even when the driver is alone in the car, as a vehicle is considered a public place. The high court said a mask acts as Suraksha Kavach, which would prevent the spread of the deadly virus.

Which of the following can be hypothesized from the above statement?

(I) People will follow the rules to wear mask even they are alone in car.
(II) Awareness among people will be spread as court has termed “Suraksha Kavach” to mask.
(III) Less car will be seen on the roads of Delhi after verdict of High Court.

Correct Answer: Only I and II

To determine which of the statements can be hypothesized (assumed or predicted to happen) from the Delhi High Court's ruling, let us analyze each statement individually based on the passage:

Statement (I): People will follow the rules to wear mask even they are alone in car.
Since the High Court has dismissed the petitions challenging the fines and officially ruled that wearing a mask inside a private car is mandatory (even when driving alone), it is logical to hypothesize that the threat of legal penalties and fines will make people comply with this rule. Therefore, Statement (I) is a valid hypothesis.

Statement (II): Awareness among people will be spread as court has termed “Suraksha Kavach” to mask.
By characterizing the mask as a "Suraksha Kavach" (protective shield) that prevents the spread of a deadly virus, the High Court highlights its critical health benefits. This strong terminology from a high-profile judicial body is expected to increase public awareness and underscore the importance of masks. Therefore, Statement (II) is also a valid hypothesis.

Statement (III): Less car will be seen on the roads of Delhi after verdict of High Court.
This statement is an extreme and implausible assumption. People rely on cars for daily commuting, work, and personal transit. It is highly unlikely that drivers will stop using their vehicles altogether simply because they are required to wear a mask. Therefore, Statement (III) cannot be hypothesized from the verdict.

Thus, only statements (I) and (II) can be hypothesized from the given statement.