X an employer of M Bank was arrested by the police upon a written complaint of M Bank, but X was acquitted at session trial. X claimed damages and court held that (Guari Pd. v. Chartered Bank case)

Answer: Option A

The case of Guari Pd. v. Chartered Bank pertains to the concept of false imprisonment. In this case, the court held that the bank had a probable cause for initiating the arrest of X, the employee. As a result, it was ruled that there was no false imprisonment on the part of the bank.

Option B: Bank had a reasonable cause hence no false imprisonment is not the correct answer as the case specifically refers to a probable cause rather than a reasonable cause.

Option C: As bank caused arrest of X hence bank is liable is not the correct answer as the court's ruling in the mentioned case established that there was no false imprisonment due to the probable cause presented by the bank.

Option D: None of these is not the correct answer as explained above.

Given the options provided, the correct answer is Option A: Bank had a probable cause hence no false imprisonment.