Singh, an Indian national, was initially charged with disfiguring a man with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and common assault.

A man bit the end off another man's nose in a fight at a party, but his lawyer has argued a conviction would be out of proportion to the crime.

Satinder Singh, 22, was at a party in Blenheim when he got into an argument with an acquaintance in the early hours of March 25.

A police summary of facts said Singh slapped the man and pushed him onto a couch and they rolled onto the ground in a struggle.

Singh ended up on top of the man, where he bit the end of the man's nose which split and a large portion of flesh came away from the nose.

People separated the men and the police were called.

The man had a large gash to his nose and was taken to Wairau Hospital, in Blenheim, where he underwent surgery. He also had a loose tooth from the fight.

He spent two nights in hospital.

When spoken to by police, Singh declined to comment.

Singh, an Indian national, was initially charged with disfiguring a man with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and common assault.

However, when he appeared at the Blenheim District Court on Monday, Judge David Ruth amended the disfiguring charge to wounding with intent to injure, reducing the maximum penalty from 14 years' imprisonment to seven.

Singh pleaded guilty and his lawyer Rob Harrison applied for a discharge without conviction, arguing the consequences for Singh would be severe.

Singh was a chef at a Blenheim restaurant where he was learning to cook European cuisine, and hoped to use his skills to further his career possibly by travelling to Europe.

He had a work visa to be renewed after his sentencing, and Immigration New Zealand could decline his visa renewal whether he was convicted or not, but if Singh was convicted he would need to prove good character to be able to stay in the country.

Singh had shown genuine remorse for his actions, Harrison said. He went to a restorative justice meeting with the man and paid $2000 to him in compensation.

He also went to an anger management course and alcohol and drug counselling.

Crown prosecutor Sefton Revell said it was not the role of the court to decide if a person should be protected from the possibility of deportation, but the immigration department, and it should not affect the judge's sentencing.

A pre-sentencing report said Singh had a low risk of reoffending and was a medium risk to others.

Judge Ruth said the offending had "its genesis in having far too much to drink".

"Between you and the victim, three bottles of whiskey were consumed. On this occasion you really went off the deep end in a binge drinking session. The clinician tells me you didn't really have any experience with drinking before you came to New Zealand and increased your drinking once you became a part of that sort of culture here."

A victim impact statement said the man took equal responsibility for starting the fight and did not wish for Singh to be convicted, Judge Ruth said.

He accepted a conviction would make it difficult for Singh to stay in the country and that he had done everything in his power to reduce the harm he caused.

Judge Ruth discharged Singh without conviction on both charges.