The father of Sara Sharif should have been given a whole life order for his daughter’s murder, the Court of Appeal has been told.

Urfan Sharif and Beinash Batool were jailed for life in December, with minimum terms of 40 and 33 years respectively, after being found guilty of the 10-year-old’s murder.

Sara’s uncle, Faisal Malik, was found guilty of causing or allowing her death and was jailed for 16 years. All three are seeking leave to appeal their sentences, but the Solicitor General wants Sharif’s sentence increased.

At a hearing to consider all aspects of the sentences, Tom Little KC, for the Solicitor General, said Sara’s murder was a rare case of such “exceptionally high seriousness” that it warranted a whole life order for Sharif.

Someone handed a life sentence can be released from prison on licence after serving a minimum term, but a whole life order means a person can never be released, except in exceptional compassionate circumstances.

Judges at the Court of Appeal are hearing the application on behalf of Lucy Rigby KC MP, who said Sharif’s sentence of a minimum of 40 years was “unduly lenient”.

Sara was found dead in a bunkbed at their family home in Woking, Surrey, in August 2023.

She suffered 71 injuries, including 25 broken bones, iron burns on her bottom, scalding marks to her feet and human bite marks.

In written submissions to the Court of Appeal, the Solicitor General said the judge was wrong not to impose a whole life order on Sharif.

She said the facts amounted to “the most horrendous and extensive period of torture in the victim’s own home”.

At the same hearing, Sharif, Batool and Malik appeared separately via video-link from prison.

Applicants must get permission or “leave” from a judge before an appeal against a sentence can be made.

Naeem Mian KC, for Sharif, argued that his client’s existing life sentence with a minimum term of 40 years was “plainly manifestly excessive”.

Mr Mian KC told the court that there could be little argument that this was a case that warranted a 30-year starting point, but that the course of conduct by Sharif after Sara’s death did not warrant the sentence rising to 40 years.

For Batool, Caroline Carberry KC told the court her client’s sentence was “not a just and proportionate sentence”.

Ms Carberry KC said Batool’s culpability was “significantly lower” than her husband’s, and that the trial judge did not give significant weight to her “secondary role”.

Michael Ivers KC, for Malik, suggested his sentence did not properly reflect the factual findings of the sentencing judge.

He said the judge sentenced Malik on the basis that he did not cause Sara’s death, but rather failed to take reasonable steps to prevent it.

The hearing continues.