One Y suffered serious injuries in a railway accident. He was assisted by a surgeon, X, on the evidence of whose Y succeeded in recovering heavy damages against the Railway. Later on it was reported to the Railway that Y did not suffer so serious an injury as was made out by X who fraudulently created those symptoms. On legal advice obtained by the Railway, X was prosecuted but he was acquitted. He brought a suit against Railway for malicious prosecution.

A. X would succeed

B. X would not succeed as the railway had a reasonable and probable cause of action

C. In fact the railways should not have prosecuted X

D. X should succeed as he was falsely prosecuted

Answer: Option B