In which one of the following cases, the Constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights of Divorce) Act 1986, was upheld by the Supreme Court of India ?

examrobotsa's picture

Submitted by examrobotsa on

Q: 92 (CDS-I/2016)
In which one of the following cases, the Constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights of Divorce) Act 1986, was upheld by the Supreme Court of India ?

question_subject: 

Polity

question_exam: 

CDS-I

stats: 

0,16,101,90,16,7,4

keywords: 

{'supreme court': [12, 1, 4, 14], 'constitutional validity': [0, 0, 1, 1], 'shah bano begum': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'muhammad ahmed khan': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'muslim women': [0, 0, 0, 1], 'divorce': [1, 1, 0, 1], 'cases': [3, 0, 2, 8], 'kerala': [7, 2, 0, 3], 'shankari prasad': [0, 0, 0, 2], 'rights': [0, 0, 1, 4], 'india': [8, 1, 7, 13]}

In the case of Danial Latifi v. Union of India, the Constitutional validity of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights of Divorce) Act 1986 was upheld by the Supreme Court of India. It is important to understand the context of this Act to fully grasp why the Supreme Court upheld its validity.

The Act was enacted to provide protection to Muslim women by giving them certain rights in divorce cases. It aimed to ensure that Muslim women were not left without any financial support upon divorce. However, this Act was met with controversy and faced challenges regarding its constitutional validity.

In the case of Muhammad Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum, the Supreme Court had initially ruled in favor of Shah Bano and had granted her maintenance after divorce. However, this ruling created a backlash, which led to the enactment of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. This Act was specifically passed to overturn the Supreme Court`s decision in the Shah Bano case and limit the financial rights of Muslim women.

Therefore, option 1 is incorrect as the Supreme Court did not uphold the Constitutional validity of the Act in that case. Option 2 is the correct answer as it is in this case that the Supreme Court upheld the validity of the Act.