JUDGMENT : S. Murtaza Fazl Ali, J. - Heard counsel for the parties. According to the finding of the High Court, the altercation between the deceased and the appellant occurred on the construction of a wall which, according to the High Court, belonged to the accused and the complainant had no right to protest against the said construction. The High Court has therefore clearly found that although the appellant had the right of private defence, yet in giving a fatal blow to the deceased, he had conceded the right of private defence. 2. Having regard to the injuries sustained by the deceased and the finding of the High Court that the appellant had merely exceeded the right of private defence, the case of the appellant equally falls within the four corners of Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code. We therefore alter the conviction of the appellant from one under Section 304 Part I to that under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and reduce the sentence from seven years to two years? rigorous imprisonment. The conviction under Section 3 of the Indian Penal Code is affirmed and the sentence will run concurrently. 3. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. Appeal allowed.