Consider the following statements:Statement I: At the 28th United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP28), India refrained from signing the 'Declaration on Climate and Health'.Statement II: The COP 28 Declaration on Climate and Health is a binding declaration; and if signed, it becomes mandatory to decarbonize health sector.Statement III: If India's health sector is decarbonized, the resilience of its health- care system may be compromised.Which one of the following is correct in respect of the above statements?

1. A

   Both Statement II and Statement III are correct and both of them explain Statement I

   Both II and III correct and both explain I. II fails: the COP28 Declaration on Climate and Health is a political declaration, not a binding instrument that would make health-sector decarbonisation mandatory.

2. B

   Both Statement II and Statement III are correct but only one of the them explains Statement I

   Both II and III correct but only one explains I. That still needs II to be true. It is not.

3. C

   Only one of the Statements II and III is correct and that explains Statement I

   Only one of II and III is correct and that explains I. India did refrain from signing at COP28 (I). III is the reported concern: diesel backup, cold chain and rural facilities still need reliable power; a blunt decarbonisation mandate could weaken surge capacity. That is why I holds. II is the distractor that treats a COP declaration as hard law.

4. D

   Neither Statement II nor Statement III is correct

   Neither II nor III. III is the explanation for India’s stand.

Summary. Official key is (c): India skipped the COP28 climate-and-health declaration because it is not a binding treaty (II is wrong), while Statement III — worry that a forced health-sector decarbonisation could hit resilience — is the line that explains the refusal. (a) and (b) treat the declaration as binding; (d) drops III.