According to the principle settled by the Supreme Court in which of the following cases, the statutory…

In Noor Saba Khatoon v. Mohd. Quasim, (1997) 6 SCC 233, the Supreme Court held that a Muslim father's statutory obligation to maintain his minor children under the general criminal procedure provision for maintenance—now Section 144 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (formerly Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973)—is independent of, and not curtailed by, the two-year maintenance provision in Section 3(1)(b) of the Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986. Under Section 144(1)(b)–(c) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, summary maintenance before a Magistrate extends to legitimate or illegitimate minor children unable to maintain themselves (including, under the first proviso to Section 144(1), a married minor female child whose husband is not possessed of sufficient means) until they attain majority, and to a child who has attained majority (not being a married daughter) only where such adult child is by reason of any physical or mental abnormality or injury unable to maintain itself; as subsequently clarified in Abhilasha v. Parkash, (2021) 13 SCC 99, an unmarried daughter's right under personal law to be maintained until marriage is distinct from the summary remedy under Section 144(1) and is enforceable before a Family Court or civil court exercising personal-law jurisdiction. Danial Latifi v. Union of India (2001) dealt with a divorced Muslim wife's right to a reasonable and fair provision and maintenance under Section 3(1)(a) of the 1986 Act; Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) concerned bigamy committed after religious conversion without dissolving an existing Hindu marriage; and Mohammad Aslam Khan v. Khalilul Rehman (1947) is a Privy Council decision on property law.