Court Raises Minimum Term for Henry Nowak’s Killer to 24 Years, 190 Days

England's Court of Appeal has increased the minimum prison term for Vickrum Digwa, who murdered 18-year-old Henry Nowak in Southampton, after ruling the original sentence was too lenient. Digwa must now serve at least 24 years and 190 days before he can be considered for parole, up from 21 years, according to the BBC and The Guardian.

The court also refused Digwa permission to challenge his sentence as excessive. The ruling followed a referral by Attorney General Ellie Reeves.

How the case reached the Court of Appeal

• Dec. 3, 2025: Digwa stabbed Nowak with a large dagger on Belmont Road in Southampton, the BBC reported. Digwa told police that Nowak had racially abused him. According to The Guardian, officers arrested and handcuffed Nowak before they saw his fatal injuries. Digwa also filmed his dying victim, The Guardian reported.
• June: Digwa was jailed for life at Southampton Crown Court with a minimum term of 21 years. The trial judge found his accusation of racism was a lie, the BBC reported.
• July: Digwa's mother, Kiran Kaur, was jailed for three years for assisting an offender by removing the knife from the scene. She dropped an appeal against her sentence shortly before Thursday's hearing, according to the BBC.
• Thursday: Three judges heard both Reeves's referral and Digwa's challenge. Digwa joined by video link from HMP Frankland.

What the judges decided

Lady Chief Justice Carr, sitting with Mr Justice Nicklin and Mr Justice Wall, said the original term did not reflect the overall seriousness of the murder. She called it "not only lenient, but unduly so."

The court replaced the 21-year term with a minimum of 25 years, then deducted the 175 days Digwa spent in custody on remand. That produced the operative figure of 24 years and 190 days. The BBC's headline cites the 25-year figure, while The Guardian reports the reduced total.

Carr said the sentencing judge had understated two things, The Guardian reported. The first was the repeated use of a large, readily available dagger with intent to kill an unarmed man. The second was the deliberate cruelty, added suffering and obstruction of justice that followed the stabbing.

The BBC reported that Carr accepted the trial judge was entitled to start at 15 years, because he found Digwa had not taken the knife to the scene intending to commit a crime. She said a very significant increase was still needed because of the large kirpan. The judges also agreed that some factors, such as the wider community impact Digwa had not intended, should not have counted against him.

The arguments over the religious blade

A kirpan is a religious knife that baptised Sikhs are expected to carry, and the law allows it to be carried in public for religious reasons. Digwa had a small one, and also a larger dagger because of his membership of the Nihang order of Sikhs, according to the BBC and The Guardian.

Jonathan Polnay KC, for the attorney general, said the case was not about lawful possession of a kirpan but about what followed. He argued that using a legally protected item for repeated lethal violence was comparable, on one level, to an abuse of trust.

Carr said that lawful carrying at the outset does not reduce the seriousness of a later lethal use. She said a person who knowingly carries a large blade in public and uses it to kill is highly culpable.

Imran Khan KC, for Digwa, argued that sentences are raised only in exceptional cases involving gross error, and that the trial judge had counted overlapping factors more than once. He also said Nowak's wounds were unsurvivable, so Digwa's lies did not worsen them, though they affected the dignity with which Nowak was treated.

Carr said the court did not need to decide whether the racism allegation was false, because the minimum term was unaffected either way.

Why it matters

The ruling sets out how a senior English court treats a lawfully carried religious blade when it is used to kill. The judges said the lawful exemption does not lessen the seriousness of a lethal attack, and that it does not shield the carrier from a longer term. Polnay said the government's case did not challenge the laws that let Sikhs carry such blades.

For Nowak's family, the court's decision is "an important step towards justice," they said in a statement reported by the BBC. They added that no sentence could return their son and that their fight was far from over. They said they would back an independent rapid review being carried out by Alex Chalk.

Reeves said the brutality and cruelty of the case horrified her and that she welcomed the increase.

What happens next

Digwa has also applied to appeal his murder conviction. The BBC reported that this application will be decided separately.

Read next
Kenyan Court Convicts Cult Leader Paul Mackenzie of Murder: How the Shakahola Case Unfolded
Hasan Execution Set for Dec. 3 at Fort Hood, First by U.S. Military Since 1961
American Gets Life Sentence in Rome for Killing Partner and Baby Daughter

Around Prague, based on reporting by The Guardian, BBC News