Hermes Vector

WorldTrending

Court of Appeal increases Vickrum Digwa's minimum sentence to 25 years

The Court of Appeal ruled that Vickrum Digwa's original 21-year minimum sentence for the murder of Henry Nowak was unduly lenient, increasing it to 25 years.

By Hermes-Vector AI Desk

Also in: Español · Português · Français · Deutsch

Checked against 5 sourcesmirror.co.uknewsandstar.co.ukchelmsfordcitynews.co.ukstandard.co.ukwisbechstandard.co.uk
Illustration for: Court of Appeal increases Vickrum Digwa's minimum sentence to 25 years

In brief

  • Vickrum Digwa's minimum sentence for the murder of Henry Nowak was increased from 21 to 25 years.
  • The Court of Appeal ruled the original sentence was 'unduly lenient.'
  • Digwa had also challenged the sentence, claiming it was 'manifestly excessive.'
  • Investigations are ongoing into the Hampshire Police's handling of the incident.

Court of Appeal increases Vickrum Digwa's minimum sentence to 25 years

The Court of Appeal has increased the minimum term of Vickrum Digwa's life sentence for the murder of 18-year-old Henry Nowak from 21 to 25 years. The ruling follows a challenge by Attorney General Ellie Reeves, who argued the original sentence was "unduly lenient."

The Court's Ruling

On Thursday, three senior judges—Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr, Mr Justice Nicklin, and Mr Justice Wall—ruled that the original sentence "fell outside the range reasonably open" to the sentencing judge. Lady Chief Justice Baroness Carr stated, "A minimum term of 21 years did not adequately reflect the overall seriousness of the murder. It was not only lenient, but unduly so."

Digwa, 23, had also challenged his sentence, with his barrister arguing the length was "manifestly excessive." While the judges found the original sentence was too long, they determined the minimum term should be increased rather than decreased.

Details of the Crime

Digwa was jailed in June after fatally stabbing Henry Nowak in Southampton on December 3 last year with a ceremonial knife with a 21cm blade. According to reports, Digwa later filmed the victim as he lay dying and provided false information to emergency services, claiming the student had racially abused him.

During the hearing, Jonathan Polnay KC, representing the Attorney General, stated that Digwa "abused the privilege" afforded to Sikhs to carry a knife in public for religious reasons. He noted that Digwa "repeatedly deployed" the weapon against an "unarmed and defenceless stranger."

At the original sentencing hearing, Judge William Mousley KC noted that Digwa was carrying two knives: a small kirpan, which is a requirement for Sikhs to carry at all times, and a "large dagger in a sheath" due to his membership in the Nihang order of Sikhs.

Ongoing Investigations

Following the killing, several investigations were launched regarding the response by Hampshire Police. The Independent Office for Police Conduct launched an investigation in July into two officers for potential gross misconduct regarding their interactions with Mr. Nowak. Additionally, His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services opened an investigation in August following a request by police and crime commissioner Donna Jones.

Digwa is also separately seeking to overturn his conviction, though a decision has yet to be made on whether that challenge will be allowed to proceed.


Sources

This article was drafted with AI assistance and checked against the sources above. Company claims are reported as claims. Cover image is AI-generated.

Questions readers ask

What was the Court of Appeal's decision regarding Vickrum Digwa's sentence?
The Court of Appeal increased the minimum term of Vickrum Digwa's life sentence from 21 to 25 years. Three senior judges ruled that the original sentence fell outside the range reasonably open to the sentencing judge.
What were the specific details of the crime committed by Vickrum Digwa?
Digwa fatally stabbed 18-year-old Henry Nowak in Southampton on December 3 last year with a ceremonial knife with a 21cm blade. He later filmed the victim as he lay dying and provided false information to emergency services.
Why did the Attorney General challenge the original sentence?
Attorney General Ellie Reeves argued that the original sentence was unduly lenient. Jonathan Polnay KC noted that Digwa abused the privilege afforded to Sikhs to carry a knife in public for religious reasons.

The day's checked news, by email

One short email a day with the top stories. Free, and you can unsubscribe in one click.

Or follow for the latest news:

Advertisement

How do you feel about this story?

Comments 0

No comments yet. Start the discussion.