Global perspective. Clear attribution. Updated throughout the day.
Live desk Concise briefs from trusted publishers · Always follow the source for the full report
Markets
GBP/USD 1.3361 FrankfurterEUR/USD 1.1467 FrankfurterUSD/NGN 1,328.07 FrankfurterUSD/JPY 157.46 FrankfurterGold $4,302.80/oz Gold APISilver $65.20/oz Gold API
Breaking
Bayelsa promises counterpart funding for rural access projects Punch NigeriaPETROAN tells fuel retailers to inspect dispensing meters nationwide Punch NigeriaLagos partners with UN and global groups on climate threats Punch NigeriaDavido’s sister describes efforts to manage his finances and spending Punch NigeriaOndo launches N400m education support for 13,360 students Punch NigeriaElumelu calls for African growth strategy centred on trade Punch NigeriaCanada details expanded screening process for incoming visitors Punch NigeriaEkiti education board gives monitors 20 vehicles for school oversight Punch NigeriaPUBG MOBILE releases Version 4.6 in Nigeria with Vampire Hunters theme Premium TimesIndia rejects OIC Contact Group comments on Kashmir The Hindu
Scores
Birmingham Legion v Brooklyn FC 16:00 UTC American USL Championship · TheSportsDBIndependiente Santa Fe v Deportivo Cali 0–1 Colombia Categoría Primera A · TheSportsDBADT v Cienciano 20:00 UTC Peruvian Primera Division · TheSportsDB
Politics

Supreme Court bench divided over larger-bench review of poll appointments

Source: NDTV · 23 Sep 2026, 10:47 UTC

India’s Supreme Court bench gave differing views on whether a challenge concerning appointments to the country’s poll body should be referred to a larger bench. Justices Dipankar Datta and Satish Chandra Sharma reached divergent positions after hearing the matter for five days, NDTV reports.

A two-judge bench of India’s Supreme Court has taken divergent views on whether a matter concerning poll-body appointments should be referred to a larger bench, NDTV reports. The bench comprised Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. The judges reached different positions after hearing the matter for five days.

The disagreement concerns the next step in the case: whether it should be considered by a larger panel of judges. The supplied material does not identify the legal arguments or the specific appointments under challenge. It also does not state whether the court issued a final order, adjourned the matter or set a date for further proceedings.

The available report therefore establishes the split within the bench, but provides no decision on the broader legal challenge or on what will happen next.

About this report
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.
View the original source at NDTV →