Henry Nowak Family Oppose Killer’s Appeal Against 21-Year Sentence

The family of murdered student Henry Nowak have condemned an attempt by his killer, Vickrum Digwa, to appeal against his life sentence, as the Court of Appeal prepares to consider competing legal challenges seeking either to reduce or increase his minimum prison term. The 23-year-old was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years for murdering the 18-year-old in Southampton on 3 December. His family have also expressed anger over the expected early release of Digwa’s mother, Kiran Kaur, who was jailed for concealing the knife used in the killing.

The two challenges are due to be considered by the Court of Appeal on Thursday. Digwa argues that his minimum sentence is excessive, while the Government has asked the court to review the punishment on the grounds that it may be unduly lenient. Judges will first determine whether either application should be allowed to proceed before considering the arguments.

Speaking to ITV News, Henry’s stepmother, Katie Nowak, said the prospect of another legal battle had placed additional emotional pressure on a family already struggling with the loss of their son.

"It just doesn't feel fair to us at all," she said.

She described the appeal as another process the family would have to endure, adding that the original verdict had been clear.

"It was a very clear verdict. It's not right that he's allowed to do this."

Alongside the appeal proceedings, Henry’s family have raised serious concerns about the expected release of Kiran Kaur, Digwa’s mother, who received a three-year prison sentence in July for assisting an offender.

Kaur was convicted after hiding the blade used by her son to murder Henry. The weapon reportedly carried Henry’s blood, making her actions a particularly painful issue for the victim’s relatives.

Henry’s mother, Lucy Ross, expressed her anger during an interview with ITV News UK Editor Paul Brand.

"Mother to mother – she is no mother," Ross said, questioning Kaur’s decision to conceal the murder weapon rather than help establish what had happened.

She added that parents had a responsibility not only to protect their children but also to teach them the distinction between right and wrong.

Henry’s father, Mark Nowak, described the prospect of Kaur’s early release as an "absolute disgrace". He questioned how someone sentenced to three years in prison could potentially return to the community after serving approximately a year in custody.

The family have highlighted the timing of her anticipated release in December, which falls close to the anniversary of Henry’s death.

For the Nowaks, the prospect of Kaur spending Christmas with her family while they continue to mourn their son has intensified their sense of injustice.

Ross also pointed out that Kaur could potentially arrange prison visits to see her son after her release, while Henry’s family have been left visiting his grave.

Kaur’s anticipated release is connected to changes introduced under the Sentencing Act 2026, which altered the automatic release arrangements for many prisoners serving standard fixed-term sentences in England and Wales.

Under the revised arrangements, most eligible prisoners are automatically released on licence after serving one-third of their custodial sentence, replacing the previous thresholds of 40% or 50%.

Kaur is expected to serve the remainder of her sentence in the community under licence conditions. This means her release would not represent the cancellation of her sentence. If she breaches the conditions attached to her licence, she could be recalled to prison.

The Ministry of Justice has confirmed that the 221 days Kaur spent on remand were taken into account when her sentence was imposed. Her offence of assisting an offender is not among the categories excluded from the revised early-release arrangements.

Kaur is an Indian national. The Home Office has previously stated that it intends to deport foreign national offenders at the earliest opportunity. However, no specific decision concerning Kaur’s case has been announced.

Henry’s family have called on the Government to reconsider the arrangements, arguing that the impact on victims and their relatives should receive greater consideration when decisions about early release are made.

Katie Nowak said victims needed to be given considerably more weight throughout the criminal justice process, adding that the family had often felt unsupported.

Another important issue surrounding the case concerns the blade Digwa claimed to have been carrying for religious reasons associated with his Sikh faith.

Former Old Bailey judge Wendy Joseph KC explained to BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the religious justification for possessing a blade and its use as a weapon were legally distinct matters.

She said a religious reason could provide a defence to an offence of carrying a blade, but that protection would no longer apply if the weapon was used as an instrument of violence.

Joseph also explained that the circumstances in which a murder weapon is carried can have a significant impact on the minimum term imposed following a life sentence.

Where an offender unlawfully carries a weapon to a location intending to use it in connection with an offence, the starting point for the minimum term can be 25 years. Where the weapon was lawfully carried and there was no intention to use it to commit an offence, the starting point can be 15 years.

These sentencing considerations are relevant to the competing challenges now facing the Court of Appeal. Digwa is seeking a reduction in his minimum term, while the Government believes the sentence may warrant an increase.

The forthcoming hearing represents another significant stage in a case that has left Henry Nowak’s family facing continuing emotional and legal uncertainty.

The immediate question for the judges is whether either challenge should be permitted to proceed. If permission is granted, the court will consider the arguments surrounding the appropriateness of the 21-year minimum term.

For the Nowak family, however, the proceedings are about more than the length of a prison sentence. They have repeatedly raised concerns about the treatment of victims’ families, the consequences of concealing evidence and the impact of early-release arrangements.

Daily Dazzling Dawn understands from the reported proceedings that both sentencing challenges remain subject to the Court of Appeal’s decision. No outcome should be assumed before the judges have considered the applications.

As the family continues to seek accountability following Henry’s murder, the forthcoming legal decision will be closely watched by those concerned with sentencing policy, victims’ rights and the operation of the criminal justice system in England and Wales.