- (1.) This appeal under the Supreme court (Enlargement of criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act is directed against the judgment of the Mysore High court convicting the appellant under S. 302 and sentencing him to imprisonment for life. Detailed facts of the case have been narrated in the judgment of the High court and it is not necessary for us to reproduce the same here. The main allegation against the appellant was that he had shot deceased Nazirunnissa and killed her. So far as the facts are concerned both the Sessions Judge and the High court have concurrently found that the case was fully proved. The Sessions judge was of the opinion that the first appellant wanted to kill Public Witness 15, but as pw 15 was not available at that time, Nazirunnissa came in between and she was shot, therefore the appellant could be guilty of an offence under S. 304-A or under S. 307 I PC. This view of the learned Sessions Judge was legally erroneous as rightly pointed out by the High court. S. 301 furnishes a complete answer to the view taken by the Sessions Judge. Itif obvious that the appellant had the intention to kill Public Witness 15 and if with this intention, he kills somebody else, he is undoubtedly guilty of committing murder. There is evidence of PWs 13,14 and 15 to show that A-l fired the shot and killed the deceased. There is no escape from conclusion that the appellant committed an offence under S. 302 of the IPC. In these circumstances, the High court was right in correcting the error of law committed by the learned Sessions Judge. Mrs. Udayarathnam tried to bring the case of the appellant within the ambit of S. 304-A or S. 307 but on the facts found it is not possible for u (r) to accede to her contention. For the reasons given above, there is no merit in the appeal which is, accordingly, dismissed.;