Jackson, J.

1. Plaintiff sues defendant for Rs. 500 for malicious prosecution. The District Munsif dismissed the suit and the Subordinate Judge decreed it for Rs. 200. Defendant appeals. It was argued for plaintiff that the Sub-Judges judgment is final upon what is a bare question of fact and nothing remains for discussion on second appeal. Reliance is placed upon the rulings of a single Judge in a law magazine: Sita Bam v. Thakur Prasad AIR1929All429 ; but the matter is concluded by the Privy Council in Pestonji M. Mody v. Queen Insurance Co. [1901] 25 Bom.332 It is for the Judge and not for the jury to determine what is reasonable and probable cause in an action for malicious prosecution. The jury finds the facts, the Judge draws the proper inference from the findings of the jury in that sense it is a question of law.

2. The judgment then proceeds But where the case is tried without a jury there is really nothing but a question of fact to be determined by one and the same person.

3. This passage refers to the particular case. Both Courts below had found that there was no evidence to show that the prosecution was instituted without reasonable and probable cause. Then of cours