DANIAL LATIFI vs THE UNION OF INDIA

The Supreme Court upheld the constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986, clarifying that Section 127(3)(b) of the CrPC does not absolve a husband from his obligation to provide maintenance to a divorced wife merely because mahr has been paid. The Court emphasized that the provisions of the CrPC override personal laws in matters of maintenance, and that mahr, while related to marriage, does not serve as a substitute for maintenance under Section 125 CrPC. The ruling confirmed that divorced women can seek maintenance orders against their former husbands, ensuring their right to financial support post-divorce.