Introduction: Arch width discrepancy is important to predict treatment outcome as it affects the space availability and stability of dentition. Negligence to maintain arch form has been recognized as a prime cause of relapse. Aim and objective: To assess the differences in intermolar and intercanine distances among class I, class II division 1, and class II division 2 malocclusion following orthodontic treatment. Materials and methods: The study was performed on models of pre- and posttreatment from records of 100 patients visiting the Department of Orthodontics, MMCDSR using a digital Vernier caliper to measure intermolar and intercuspid distance. The sample comprised of both male and female patients of age group 14–25 years divided into three different groups, group I—class I malocclusion, group II—class II division 1 malocclusion, and group III—class II division 2 malocclusion. The results obtained were subjected to statistical analysis. Group II showed higher pretreatment intercanine width than group I whereas group III had lower pretreatment intercanine width than both group I and group II. Group I showed higher pretreatment intermolar width than group II. Pretreatment intercanine width was higher in group II compared with group I whereas it was lower for group III when compared with group I for the mandible.