Sentencing for intermediate quantities of narcotics must adhere to the principle of proportionality over mathematical formulas.

The appellant was convicted by the Special Judge Rohru under Sections 21 and 29 of the NDPS Act for possession of 13 grams of Heroin

The Trial Court sentenced him to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment and a fine of ₹1,00,000

On appeal, the appellant did not contest the conviction on merits but challenged the quantum of sentence as disproportionate for an "intermediate quantity" of contraband

The respondent argued that the appellant was involved in another similar case

1. Whether the quantum of sentence imposed upon the appellant is proportionate to the quantity of contraband recovered and in consonance with settled sentencing principles

2. Whether the pendency of another criminal case against the accused can be a valid ground for determining or enhancing the quantum of sentence

Section 21(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, which prescribes punishment for "intermediate quantity" ranging from one day up to 10 years

Section 49 of the Bharatiya Sakshya Adhiniyam, 2023 (formerly Section 54 of the Evidence Act), which stipulates that previous bad character is irrelevant in criminal proceedings unless in reply to evidence of good character

Principle of Proportionality as established in Alister Anthony Pareira v. State of Maharashtra and Uggarsain v. State of Haryana, emphasizing that sentencing must balance deterrence with rehabilitation and be fact-dependent

The court reasoned that while mathematical proportionality (dividing the sentence strictly by the gram) is not a rigid norm, a sentence of 10 years for 13 grams of heroin—where the intermediate range spans 6 to 250 grams—is excessively harsh

The court noted that 10 years is the maximum possible sentence for this category, typically reserved for quantities closer to the commercial threshold (250g)

Regarding the respondent's plea of the appellant's other pending cases, the court held that under the presumption of innocence and Jitender v. State of Uttar Pradesh, a pending trial cannot be considered for sentencing as the accused is not yet a "convict" in those matters

The court found that for 13 grams, a sentence exceeding 15 months was disproportionate to the crime's gravity

The fine was reduced from ₹1,00,000 to ₹20,000, with a default imprisonment term of three months. As the appellant had already undergone 1 year and 3 months in custody, the court ordered his immediate release if not required in any other case