Assertion(A): Daulatabad fortess was besieged by the Mughal forces in the year 1631 and it had to be surrendered to them. Reason (R) : Malik Ambar betrayed his Sultan during the siege of Daulatabad fortress by Mughal forces.

examrobotsa's picture

Submitted by examrobotsa on

Q: 65 (CDS-I/2003)
Assertion(A): Daulatabad fortess was besieged by the Mughal forces in the year 1631 and it had to be surrendered to them.
Reason (R) : Malik Ambar betrayed his Sultan during the siege of Daulatabad fortress by Mughal forces.

question_subject: 

History

question_exam: 

CDS-I

stats: 

0,22,53,36,15,22,2

keywords: 

{'mughal forces': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'daulatabad fortress': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'daulatabad fortess': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'siege': [0, 0, 2, 1], 'sultan': [0, 0, 1, 0], 'malik ambar': [0, 0, 2, 0]}

The statement in option 1 asserts that both A (Daulatabad fortress was besieged by the Mughal forces in the year 1631) and R (Malik Ambar betrayed his Sultan during the siege of Daulatabad fortress by Mughal forces) are individually true, and R is the correct explanation for A. However, this is not accurate.

Option 2 states that both A and R are individually true, but R is not the correct explanation of A. This option aligns with the correct answer.

Option 3 suggests that A is true, but R is false. This statement correctly reflects that Daulatabad fortress was indeed besieged by the Mughal forces in the year 1631, but it does not explicitly confirm or deny whether Malik Ambar betrayed his Sultan during the siege.

Option 4 claims that A is false, but R is true. This is not accurate since historical evidence supports the fact that the Mughal forces did besiege the Daulatabad fortress in 1631.

In conclusion, the correct answer is option 3, as it correctly identifies that A is true, but R is false. The siege of Daulatabad fortress took place, but there is no confirmation or proof