To determine the correctness of the given statements, let's analyze each one separately:
- Statement I: \(C–Cl\) bond is stronger in \(\mathrm{CH_2 = CH{-}Cl}\) than in \(\mathrm{CH_3{-}CH_2{-}Cl}\).
- The molecule \(\mathrm{CH_2 = CH{-}Cl}\) has a sp2 hybridized carbon (due to the double bond), whereas \(\mathrm{CH_3{-}CH_2{-}Cl}\) has a sp3 hybridized carbon.
- In sp2 hybridization, the s-character is higher compared to sp3 hybridization. This increased s-character leads to a stronger and shorter bond.
- Therefore, the \(C–Cl\) bond in \(\mathrm{CH_2 = CH{-}Cl}\) is stronger than in \(\mathrm{CH_3{-}CH_2{-}Cl}\).
- Conclusion: Statement I is true.
- Statement II: The given optically active molecule, on hydrolysis, gives a solution that can rotate plane polarized light.
- An optically active compound contains a chiral center and can rotate plane-polarized light.
- Upon hydrolysis, the optical activity depends on the configuration of the products. In many cases, if a compound remains chiral after the reaction, the product would still be optically active.
- Thus, if the molecule is initially optically active, it's likely that one or more hydrolysis products will also be optically active, thereby rotating plane-polarized light.
- Conclusion: Statement II is true.
Based on our analysis, we can conclude that both Statement I and Statement II are true. Therefore, the correct answer is:
Both Statement I and Statement II are true