The Court of Appeal judges ruled Vickrum Digwa's prison sentence for the murder of Henry Nowak was unduly lenient
Digwa was jailed for life with a minimum term of 21 years for stabbing the 18-year-old student to death in Southampton in December 2025
He had sought permission to challenge the length of his sentence at the Court of Appeal
The appeal court judges ruled the initial sentence "did not adequately reflect the overall seriousness of the murder"
His minimum 21-year prison sentence was quashed and increased to 25 years
Jonathan Polnay KC, for the Attorney General, earlier argued Digwa's 21-year minimum term was too lenient, citing his use of a large dagger, abusing the religious exemption to carry it, and his conduct as Henry Nowak lay dying
Imran Khan KC, for Digwa, had argued his 21-year minimum term was too long, saying the judge counted overlapping aggravating factors more than once
The family statement goes on to say they have been "given a life sentence of grief".
"There is no appeal for us, no reduction in our suffering and no prospect of ever getting our son back," the statement says.
This concludes our live coverage, but you can read the fully story here.
The family of Henry Nowak's has issued a statement following the Court of Appeal's decision that Digwa's 21-year jail sentence was unduly lenient.
They said: “We are grateful to the Attorney General for recognising the seriousness of this crime and referring the original sentence for review.
“This decision represents an important step towards justice for Henry and our family. But no sentence, however long, can ever give Henry his life back.
“Meanwhile we will never give up our fight for the truth, accountability and meaningful change.
“Henry deserves nothing less."
Image source, GettyAttorney General Ellie Reeves has responded to the ruling.
Posting on X, she said: "Vickrum Digwa stabbed student Henry Nowak to death in a brutal attack.
"I welcome today’s increase in his minimum term from 21 years to 25 years after I referred his case via the Unduly Lenient Sentence scheme."
Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent
Judges at the Court of Appeal concluded that the judge presiding over Digwa's trial "understated two distinct dimensions of the offence".
One of those, The Lady Chief Justice said, was the circumstances in which a "large and immediately available dagger" was used repeatedly with the intention of killing an unarmed man.
She said the second was the "deliberate cruelty, additional suffering and obstruction" which followed the stabbing.
She added: "A minimum term of 21 years did not adequately reflect the overall seriousness of the murder. It was not only lenient, but unduly so."
Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent
The Lady Chief Justice said the trial judge was entitled to start at 15 years, as he had found Digwa did not take the large kirpan to the scene intending to commit a crime.
But she said a “very significant uplift” was needed because of its use.
“The fact that the knife’s initial carriage had been lawful does not reduce the seriousness of its subsequent unlawful use,” she said.
The judges said that before aggravating and mitigating factors, his offending merited 23 years.
The aggravating factors, including filming Henry as he lay dying and his mother removing the weapon, took that to at least 27 years.
Mitigation brought it down to 25 years.
Vickrum Digwa has had his minimum jail term for murdering Henry Nowak increased from 21 years to 25 years by the Court of Appeal.
Judges ruled the original sentence was unduly lenient, and refused Digwa permission to appeal against it.
Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent
The Lady Chief Justice said the judge at Digwa's trial was entitled to take 15 years as the appropriate starting point for his jail sentence.
She noted that Parliament set a starting point of 25 years where an offender takes a knife to the scene with an intention to commit a crime.
During the trial, the judge found that Digwa had not taken the large kirpan to the scene with the intention to commit a crime - that conclusion was open to him on the evidence.
However, she said that 15 years is the appropriate start for the minimum term for murder - not all offenders have the same culpability.
The judge can and should move up from that starting point, she said.
Cachella Smith
Reporting from court
The Lady Chief Justice is currently setting out the facts of the night of Henry Nowak’s murder – she has told the court they will be delivering a judgment today.
As she does so, the rest of the court looks on silently.
Digwa continues to watch proceedings via a video link from HMP Frankland.
He is not showing any visible emotion as he listens.
The judge describes an “incomprehensible cruelty” to Nowak as he lay on the ground dying.
Turning to the victim personal statements, she says Nowak’s family described in “moving detail” the effect his death has had – that their world has now “fallen apart”.
Dominic Casciani
Home and legal correspondent
The court hearing has resumed and the Lady Chief Justice is giving the summary of the facts of the crime ahead of the judgement.
Stuart Rust
South of England reporter
Judges at the Court of Appeal are preparing to deliver their ruling.
After hearing arguments from lawyers for the Attorney General and for Digwa this morning, they will decide whether his minimum term should be increased, reduced or left as it is.
We are expecting the decision to be announced shortly after 15:30 GMT.
Image source, ReutersFollowing Digwa's jailing in June, unrest broke out in Southampton when police body-worn video was released showing officers handcuffing the student as he lay dying after Digwa falsely told officers that the teenager had racially abused him.
Twelve police officers and a police dog were injured during the protests which began with demonstrators gathering outside the city centre police station before moving to an area near the Digwa family home.
Stuart Rust
South of England reporter
Jonathan Polnay KC, for the Attorney General (AG) earlier argued that Digwa’s behaviour after the murder warranted an increase in his minimum term.
Digwa degraded Henry Nowak by filming him as he lay dying, the court heard.
Polnay also said Digwa misled first responders, which led to Henry Nowak being arrested and handcuffed as he was dying, and made a false allegation of racism against him.
Digwa also made a “sustained attempt to pervert the course of justice”, which involved procuring his own mother’s assistance, Polnay said.
Polnay said Digwa’s behaviour before and after the offence should be seen as aggravating factors that interact with one another.
Several investigations have been launched into Hampshire Police's handling of the killing since Digwa was sentenced.
In August, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services opened an investigation into the force after a request by Hampshire's police and crime commissioner Donna Jones.
The commissioner said the inspection would cover the “end-to-end process” from call-handling in the control room, dispatch and initial attendance at incidents of serious violence.
The Independent Office for Police Conduct launched an investigation in July into two officers for potential gross misconduct over their interactions with Henry Nowak on the night he was stabbed.
The watchdog is also examining whether race or religion contributed to the officers’ decision-making.
While we wait for the judgement, expected at 15:30 GMT, a reminder that today’s hearing is only considering the length of Digwa’s sentence.
He has also applied for permission to appeal against his murder conviction, but that is being dealt with separately.
No decision has yet been made on whether that appeal can go ahead.
Image source, ITV NewsHenry Nowak's family hit out against Digwa's attempt at appeal.
In an interview with ITV News, external before today's hearing, Henry's stepmother, Katie Nowak says: "It just doesn't feel fair to us at all.
"It's another process that we've got to go through. It's another fight that we have to have.
"It was a very clear verdict. It's not right that he's allowed to do this."
The family have also called it a "disgrace" that Digwa's mother, Kiran Kaur, jailed for three years for hiding the knife, may be released early in December.
Cachella Smith
Reporting from court
Court has adjourned for the morning while the three judges retire to consider the arguments they have heard this morning.
As a reminder, lawyers for the Attorney General are arguing Digwa's sentence for the murder of Henry Nowak was too lenient while his barristers are saying it was too long.
Digwa appeared via video link from HMP Frankland. He was calm during proceedings and sat with his hands crossed on his lap.
Nowak's family were also in court.
The Attorney General's case is that the minimum term on Digwa's sentence did "not reflect the seriousness" of the offence.
Stuart Rust
South of England reporter
Submissions have now finished at the Court of Appeal.
The judges have retired to consider the Attorney General’s application to have Digwa’s sentence increased and Digwa’s application to appeal against it.
They expect to give their judgment this afternoon, provisionally at 15:30 GMT.
Stuart Rust
South of England reporter
Nic Lobbenberg KC, opposing Digwa’s application for leave to appeal, said the Recorder of Southampton had been “transparent” in his sentencing remarks.
He said sentencing was “not an arithmetic calculation” and should be seen “as a cohesive whole”. He described the defence complaint as “effectively salami slicing”.
This was a case of a weapon used in public on an unarmed man, he said.
The pathology showed five separate target areas and three substantial wounds, two of them to the back of the body, and no defensive wounds on Henry Nowak.
He said that some cases "outrage and horrify the collective consciousness" and that this was one of them.
Stuart Rust
South of England reporter
In closing, Khan said: “To put it pithily, the Attorney General says 21 years was too little. We say it was too much.”
He argued the Attorney General had pointed mainly to the gravity of the offence, while the defence pointed to sentencing error.
“Gravity, we submit, does not, without more, establish gross error,” he said.
He said the Attorney General had not shown 21 years was outside the range reasonably open to the judge.
