Which of the following arguments is fallacious because the middle term is present in both positive and negative instances and violates the rule that it should not be present in the negative instances?

The fallacious argument is "the hill has fire because it is knowable".

Here the middle term is knowable, offered as the reason for inferring fire.

But everything whatever is knowable, so the term is present alike where fire exists and where it does not.

A reason found in both positive and negative instances strays and cannot fix the conclusion, violating the rule that it must be absent from negative cases.

This straying middle is the savyabhichara, the non-exclusive or inconclusive fallacy.