Let's evaluate the statements based on organic chemistry principles.
Analysis of Statement I:
1. Reactant: 3-phenylprop-1-ene ($Ph-CH_2-CH=CH_2$).
2. Reagent: $HBr$.
3. Mechanism: Electrophilic addition. The first intermediate is a secondary carbocation ($Ph-CH_2-CH^+-CH_3$). A 1,2-hydride shift occurs to form a secondary benzylic carbocation ($Ph-CH^+-CH_2-CH_3$), which is resonance-stabilized by the benzene ring.
4. Major Product: $Ph-CH(Br)-CH_2-CH_3$ (1-bromo-1-phenylpropane).
5. Characterization: This is a secondary alkyl bromide. The carbon atom attached to the $Br$ atom is bonded to four different groups ($-H$, $-Br$, $-C_2H_5$, $-C_6H_5$), making it chiral. Thus, Statement I is correct.
Analysis of Statement II:
1. Sandmeyer Reaction: Converts diazonium salts to $Ar-Cl$, $Ar-Br$, or $Ar-CN$ using $Cu(I)$ salts like $CuCl$, $CuBr$, or $CuCN$. This is true.
2. Gattermann Reaction: A modification using $Cu$ powder and $HX$ to produce $Ar-Cl$ or $Ar-Br$. It does not typically apply to the synthesis of aryl cyanides ($Ar-CN$), for which the Sandmeyer method is used. Thus, the statement is incorrect in claiming Gattermann can be used for aryl cyanides. Statement II is false.
Conclusion: Statement I is True, Statement II is False.