two other daughters - 22-year-old Rajakumari and 31-year-old Indrakumari - are studying and working in England respectively. An acquaintance of Mohamed Azad reportedly stated that two days before his death, while celebrating Deepavali, Mohamed Azad kept asking questions about what happen to people after their deaths, which seemed to be a premonition of his death. Mohamed's sister also stated that prior to his death, Mohamed was poring over books about afterlife and death. Six months later, Nadarajah's appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal on 17 February 1976, as they also disagreed with the defence counsel that Nadarajah indeed lost self control and killed Mohamed Azad in a fit of uncontrollable anger. Likewise, Deva Kumari was not at court to hear the verdict, as she was away in Europe. Nadarajah's death row plea for leave to appeal to the Privy Council in London was also rejected in July 1976. On the Friday morning of 28 January 1977, 60-year-old Nadarajah Govindasamy was hanged at Changi Prison. On the same date of Nadarajah's execution, 23-year-old soto seller and armed robber Talib bin Haji Hamzah was hanged at the same prison for using a firearm to commit robbery, therefore becoming the second person executed for a conviction under the newly enacted Arms Offences Act, where it mete out capital punishment for the use of firearms to commit a crime. Aftermath On 8 November 2004, thirty years after the murder of Mohamed Azad, Singaporean crime show True Files re-enacted the case, and the episode aired as the third episode of the show's third season. Nadarajah's former lawyer N. Ganesan was interviewed in the episode, and according to the producers of the show, nobody knew the whereabouts of Deva Kumari or the rest of Nadarajah's family. Ganesan believed that Deva Kumari and her family had left the country as he never seen them again after Nadarajah was executed. Subhas Anandan, the veteran criminal lawyer of Singapore, revealed in the episode that he was a friend of the victim, and he defended Mohamed Azad by clarifying that Mohamed Azad was not a bad person as Nadarajah painted him to be, and he said that the victim visited his fiancée's father with the intention to get approval from him to marry his daughter and reconcile their differences rather than argue with him. N. Sivanandan, the Indian court interpreter of Nadarajah's trial who retired in the 2010s