Honble KOKJE, J. – Appellant Mangalia has been convicted under Section 302 IPC for having caused the death of Deetiya by shooting an arrow at him which hit him on the chest. He has been sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life with Rs. 100/- as fine. The other two accused persons tried alongwith appellant Mangalia on charges under Section 302/34 and 114 IPC and both were acquitted. Nagji S/o Deeta had lodged a FIR with police Station Mandawa District Udaipur on 13.3.90 at 11.15 AM to the effect that on 12.3.90 at 9AM when he and the members of his family were preparing to go to bad after having meals Fulias dog came in his house and bit his buffalo. On this Nagji and his father Deeta went to Fulias house and told Fulias son that their dog had bitten their buffalo and they will take the matter to the Panchayat the next day and had come to inform him about this. After saying this when they were returning home they were chased by Ladura and his father Fulia. Ladura started assaulting Nagji with a Lathi, on which Nagji said that he and his father had not even abused them why should they beat them. One Bhoila came on spot and tried to pacify Ladura. At this juncture Mangalia came with a Bow and Arrow and Fulia incited him by reminding that Deeta had killed his father. On this Mangalia shot an arrow in the chest of Deeta. Deeta fell down and the accused persons ran away. (2). PW-1 Bholia s/o Narsa turned hostile and denied that he had seen anything in the incident. PW-3 Nagji s/o Deeta is the only eye witness of the incident who has supported the prosecution. He had clearly stated that Mangalia came running and immediately on arrival he shot the arrow which hit the chest of his father Deeta. There was a dispute between the complainant and the Mangalia. In his cross-examination he stated that the arrow was shot from a distance of 15 to 20 feets and it was a moon-lit night and he had seen Mangalia shooting the arrow. The witness was not shaken in his cross-examination and there is nothing to dis- credit him. We see no reason to disbelieve him and hold that the trial Court has rightly found the accused guilty on the evidence of this eye witness. The witness was not shaken in his cross-examination and there is nothing to dis- credit him. We see no reason to disbelieve him and hold that the trial Court has rightly found the accused guilty on the evidence of this eye witness. However, the question is as to whether the offence would be covered by Section 302 of the IPC or 304 part II of the IPC. Looking to the fact that the quarrel had taken place on a trivial matter as also looking to the fact that accused Mangalia immediately shot arrow on arrival from a distance of 15 to 20 feet, it cannot be said that the intention to cause death was there. It is true that the arrow hit at a vital part of chest the injury was three and half inch deep reaching the heart, but in absence of any evidence on record that the accused was an expert and accurate shooter it cannot be said that from 15 to 20 feet he could shoot the arrow on a particular part of the body with perfect accuracy. In Jagtar Singh vs. State of Punjab (1), the Supreme Court observed that a single knife blow inflicted deep in the chest on a trivial quarrel resulting injury to the heart causing death of the person does not necessarily show the intention to cause death. It can only be safely inferred that accused had knowledge that he was likely to cause an injury which was likely to cause death. In the present case it is not even a knife but an arrow shot from a distance. To our mind, therefore, the case does not fall under Section 302 IPC but would be covered by Section 304 part II of the IPC. For the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is partly allowed. The conviction and sentence under Section 302 of the IPC is set aside and the conviction is altered to Section 304 part II of the IPC and a sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment is imposed. He shall be released if he has already under-gone the aforesaid sentence and if he has not under-gone that sentence he shall be released on completing the period of sentence.