Examine the following three statements: 1) Shyam is not the father of Hari. 2) Hari is the son of Suresh. 3) Suresh has three sons. Which of the following conclusion can be drawn from the above statements?

The correct answer is C. Statement 2 says Hari is the son of Suresh, so Suresh must be Hari's father. This is a direct, definite inference that needs no other statement.

Why the other options fail:

• A: Suresh has three sons, so Shyam could be one of them, but nothing in the statements says so. Shyam could be an unrelated person.
• B: Hari is Suresh's son, but Shyam may or may not be a sibling. Statement 1 only denies that Shyam is Hari's father, which tells us nothing about brotherhood.
• D: Nothing in the statements talks about Shyam's children. Statement 1 only says Shyam is not Hari's father.

The core concept is the difference between a conclusion that must follow and one that merely might. This is the basic logical reasoning skill tested in UPPSC Prelims, and the same discipline helps in precise answer writing in Mains.

Trap: Aspirants see that Shyam is not Hari's father and assume Shyam must be a brother or son of Suresh. A statement that does not exclude a possibility is not a conclusion.