The ruling on one who kills a person in a fight without intent

Question:
The questioner says: A man got into a fight with another and shot at him, and he died. He is in prison now. Does he have to fast two consecutive months or not, knowing that he did not intend to kill him?

Answer:
If he shot something that would not normally kill, then he owes the expiation, because it becomes accidental killing. But if he threw a sword or a rifle or a pistol at him, then he intended to kill him, so it becomes intentional killing, and there is no expiation for it.
Q: He shot him with a rifle, but he did not intend to kill him; he intended, for example, to break his leg or wound him?
A: If he did not shoot him in a vital area, or with something that would not normally kill, like a stick or the like, then it is accidental, and he owes the expiation.
Q: He intended to shoot him with a rifle, for example, or a sword, but at his leg to frighten him?
A: If he died from that, then it is accidental, and he owes the expiation, like the woman who killed her companion with a pole. He owes the expiation and the blood money—the blood money is on the residuary male heirs.