Which of the following statements is/are correct in connection with malicious prosecution? 1. Malice is to be inferred from the acquittal of the plaintiff. 2. Malice is not to be inferred from the acquittal of the plaintiff. 3. The plaintiff must prove independently of the acquittal that his prosecution was without reasonable and probable cause, 4. The plaintiff is not required to prove that his prosecution was without reasonable and probable cause. Select the correct answer using the given below:

Which of the following requirements form an essential element of the tort of malicious prosecution?
1. Prosecution of the plaintiff by the defendant
2. Termination of the case in favour of the defendant
3. Termination of the case in favour of the plaintiff
4. Presence of reasonable and probable cause
5. Absence of reasonable and probable cause
6. Malice on the part of the defendant
7. Damage suffered by the plaintiff
Select the correct answer using the given below:

A

1, 3, 5, 6 and 7

B

1, 2, 4, 6 and 7

C

1, 3, 4, 6 and 7

D

1, 2, 5, 6 and 7

Consider the following statements:
In an action for malicious prosecution, the plaintiff must prove that the
1. Plaintiff was prosecuted by the defendant.
2. Prosecution ended in the plaintiffs favour.
3. Defendant acted without reasonable and probable cause.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

A

1 and 2

B

2 and 3

C

1 and 3

D

1, 2 and 3

Consider the following statements in regard to institute a case of malicious prosecution:
1. The proceeding must have been instituted by the defendant.
2. The proceeding must have terminated in favour of the defendant.
3. The defendant must have acted without reasonable and probable cause.
4. The defendant must have acted maliciously.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

A

1, 2 and 3

B

1, 3 and 4

C

2, 3 and 4

D

1, 2 and 4

Assertion (A): In an action for malicious prosecution it must be proved that the defendant had initiated criminal proceeding maliciously and without reasonable and probable cause.
Reason (R): Action for malicious prosecution is instituted in criminal court

A

Both A and R are true and R is the correct explanation of A

B

Both A and R are true but R is not a correct explanation of A

C

A is true but R is false

D

A is false but R is true

Consider the following statements:
In case of joint publication of defamatory statement:
1. A corporation is liable for the malice of its agent.
2. The proprietor of a newspaper is liable for the malice of the editor.
3. A lawyer is liable for the malice in the notice issued under the instructions of his client.
4. The employer is liable for the malice of a typist who types a defamatory letter as dictated by his employer.
Which of the statements given above are correct?

A

1 and 2

B

1 and 3

C

3 and 4

D

1 and 4

The defendant had filed a complaint to the Magistrate against the plaintiff. The complaint was dismissed. The defendant moved the Sessions Judge in appeal. He got himself examined in Sessions trial although he knew the charge was false and he was acting without reasonable and probable cause. His complaint was dismissed by the Session Judge. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a suit for malicious prosecution against the defendant.
In the aforesaid case, which one of the following conclusion in correct?

A

The defendant is liable for malicious prosecution

B

The defendant is not liable for malicious prosecution

C

The defendant is not liable to pay damages to the plaintiff

D

The plaintiff suit must be dismissed

A theft had been committed in the defendant's house. He informed the police that he suspected the plaintiff for the same. Therefore the plaintiff was arrested by the police. A complaint was filed by the defendant but the plaintiff was subsequently discharged by the magistrate as the final report showed that there was no evidence connecting the plaintiff with the theft. The plaintiff filed a suit for damages on the ground of malicious prosecution.
In the above case, which one of the following decisions is correct?

A

The plaintiff is entitled to claim damages from the defendant

B

The plaintiff is entitled to claim damages from the police

C

The plaintiff is entitled to claim damages from both

D

The plaintiff is not entitled to claim damages for malicious prosecution at all

To prove both the parts of the offence contemplated in Section 116 of the Indian Penal Code, which of the following must be proved by the prosecution?
1. To prove the first part, the accused did abet the offence either by instigation or by conspiracy or by intentional aiding or by illegal omission.
2. To prove the first part, the offence was such which is punishable with imprisonment.
3. To prove the second part, the person abetted was a public servant during the period he was abetted.
4. To prove the second part, it was the duty of such public servant to prevent the commission of such an offence.

A

1 and 3

B

1 and 4

C

2 and 4

D

1, 2, 3, 4

Consider the following statements:
For defamation the plaintiff has to prove that the imputation is false and malicious. In this context malicious means
1. With evil motive
2. Without just cause
3. A factor relevant in assessment of damages
4. An irrelevant plea of defamation
Which of the statements given above is/are correct?

A

With evil motive and without just cause only

B

Without just cause, a factor relevant in assessment of damages and an irrelevant plea of defamation

C

Without just cause only

D

Without just cause and a factor relevant in assessment of damages only

In which among the following cases malice becomes relevant to determine a person's liability in law of torts. Answer by using below:
(1) Malice may result in aggravation of damages
(2) It torts of deceit and conspiracy one of the essential is malice
(3) When act is lawful, intention can be gathered from past circumstances
(4) Causing of personal comfort by lawful means may tum lawful act into a tort

A

(1) and (2)

B

(1) and (3)

C

(1), (2) and (3)

D

(1), (2), (3) and (4)