Short Note : 1. The incident had started with abuse. Appellant Angad was not armed from before. The external injuries to the deceased were simple in nature. The external injuries on the umbilical region did not result in the laceration in the intestines. Dr. Madan Mohan Modi (P. W. 3) stated that perforation in the intestines is possible because of the pressure. From the evidence and injury it cannot be said that appellant Angad intended to cause death or he intended to cause such bodily injury as is likely to ca use death. Dr. Modi (PW.3) does not categorically say that the injury was sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. No doubt the appellant would be attributed with the knowledge that his act is likely to cause death. Appellant Angad had only the guilty knowledge, but not the guilty intention. He would therefore be guilty under section 304, Part II and not under section 304, Part I of the Indian Penal Code. Appeal partly allowed.