A. HARIPRASAD, J.

1. These two appeals arise out of a judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, whereby he convicted the sole accused under Sections 324 and 326 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC). Feeling aggrieved by the conviction and sentence, the accused has come up in appeal. The accused was also charged for an offence punishable under Sec.307 IPC, for which he was acquitted. State has preferred another appeal against the acquittal. Both these appeals were heard together. I dispose them by this common judgment. For clarity, the parties are referred to as the accused and the prosecution respectively.

2. Facts, in brief, are thus: Accused is a relative of PW1, the injured witness. They were in enmical terms in connection with a dispute relating to removal of earth by PW1 from his property, which caused loss of lateral support to the land of the accused. Prosecution alleged that the accused, with an intention to murder PW1 and with the knowledge that former's act is likely to cause death of him, attacked PW1 at 7.30 a.m. on 14.05.1999, while he was walking through Thiruvaniyoor-Mamala public road. The accused beat him using madakkala bat (a bat mad