The mother of the man convicted of murdering Southampton student Henry Nowak has been jailed after a court found she deliberately removed and concealed the knife used in the fatal attack, describing her actions as a calculated attempt to help her son evade justice.

Southampton Crown Court sentenced 53-year-old Kiran Kaur to three years’ imprisonment after she was found guilty of assisting an offender by taking the ceremonial Sikh knife used by her son, Vickrum Digwa, from the murder scene and hiding it inside the family home. Prosecutors argued that her actions significantly hindered the early stages of the police investigation and delayed the recovery of crucial evidence.

The sentencing follows one of Britain’s most widely scrutinised homicide cases of recent months. Digwa, 23, was convicted earlier this year of murdering 18-year-old university student Henry Nowak during an unprovoked attack in Southampton in December 2025. He was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years.

According to evidence heard during both trials, Digwa stabbed Nowak multiple times with a 21-centimetre ceremonial blade before falsely claiming the teenager had racially abused him and knocked off his turban. Those allegations initially influenced officers responding to the scene before later evidence disproved the account.

Judge William Mousley KC told Kaur that, rather than acting as a responsible parent, she chose to protect her son after knowing or believing he had stabbed another person.

The court heard that while Digwa’s brother was speaking to emergency call operators, Digwa instructed his mother to remove the knife, its sheath and belt from the scene. Instead of preserving evidence or informing police, she carried the weapon back to the family’s home.

Once there, the knife—still carrying Henry Nowak’s blood and tissue—was hidden among numerous other ceremonial and bladed weapons stored in Digwa’s bedroom. Investigators later recovered the weapon after reviewing CCTV footage and searching the property.

In sentencing remarks, Judge Mousley said Kaur’s conduct helped conceal the true nature of the attack.

“A responsible parent would have challenged their son over their actions and encouraged them to do the right thing,” the judge said.

Instead, he found, she acted because she wanted her son “to avoid being caught”.

Prosecutors argued the removal of the murder weapon had practical as well as symbolic consequences.

Without the knife at the scene, officers were deprived of immediate physical evidence linking Digwa to the stabbing. The prosecution told the court that the missing weapon hampered investigators at a critical moment and contributed to confusion surrounding the circumstances of the attack.

The court also heard emotional evidence suggesting Henry Nowak died believing authorities had not accepted that he had been stabbed after officers initially focused on allegations made by Digwa rather than the victim’s repeated pleas for help.

The killing generated international attention after police body-worn camera footage showed Nowak repeatedly telling officers he had been stabbed while lying seriously injured on the ground.

In one widely reported exchange, an officer responded, “I don’t think you have, mate,” after Nowak insisted he had suffered stab wounds.

The teenager was handcuffed during the encounter before officers fully realised the severity of his injuries. He later died at the scene from catastrophic internal bleeding.

The footage prompted widespread public criticism of Hampshire Police and led to an ongoing investigation by the Independent Office for Police Conduct into officers’ actions during the incident. Gross misconduct proceedings remain underway against two officers involved in the initial response.

Throughout Digwa’s murder trial, prosecutors rejected his claims that he acted in self-defence after alleged racist abuse.

The jury instead concluded that the attack was unlawful and convicted him of murder, while also finding him guilty of possessing a bladed article in public.

Following his conviction, Digwa received a life sentence requiring him to serve at least 21 years before becoming eligible for parole consideration.

Kaur’s defence argued she had acted in panic after receiving news that her son had been attacked and maintained she had not attempted to destroy or clean the weapon.

Her lawyers also highlighted her otherwise good character, volunteer work within the local Sikh community, limited English language skills and various health issues.

However, the sentencing judge concluded those personal circumstances did not outweigh the seriousness of deliberately removing evidence from a murder scene.

Kelly Newman of the Crown Prosecution Service said Henry Nowak’s family had suffered unimaginable loss and stressed that those who help violent offenders avoid justice should expect criminal consequences themselves.

She said Kaur deliberately obstructed investigators by removing the weapon and hiding critical evidence immediately after the killing.

The criminal proceedings surrounding the Digwa family are not yet over.

Vickrum Digwa, his older brother Gurpreet Digwa and their father Moga Singh have all pleaded not guilty to separate weapons offences after police allegedly discovered dozens of knives, swords, machetes, batons, knuckle dusters and other prohibited weapons during searches of the family home.

Those charges are expected to proceed to trial later this year.

The wider case has also reignited debate surrounding ceremonial Sikh knives, known as kirpans.

Under UK law, practising Sikhs are generally permitted to possess and carry kirpans as articles of faith under limited legal exemptions. Those exemptions, however, do not provide immunity when such items are used to commit criminal offences.

Religious organisations have repeatedly emphasised that kirpans are intended as symbolic articles representing spiritual commitment and the defence of justice rather than weapons for violence. The criminal misuse of a ceremonial blade does not alter the legal responsibilities that apply when a homicide occurs.

The case nevertheless sparked renewed public discussion over whether existing exemptions should be tightened, particularly after politicians and commentators questioned whether larger ceremonial blades should remain covered under current legislation.

No changes to UK law have yet been announced as a direct consequence of the case, although debate continues among legal experts, community leaders and politicians.

For Henry Nowak’s family, however, the focus has remained firmly on accountability.

Digwa has already received a life sentence for the murder, while his mother’s imprisonment reflects the court’s conclusion that anyone who deliberately interferes with a homicide investigation—even a close family member—can expect to face serious criminal penalties.

With the police conduct investigation continuing and additional weapons prosecutions still before the courts, the legal consequences flowing from Henry Nowak’s death are unlikely to conclude for some time. :