Judgment :- 1. These are unusual appeals filed by the State from an order of acquittal made by the Additional Sessions Judge of Parur in Sessions Case No. 16/1124. There were for accused persons who were tried in the Sessions Court. They were (1) Accused 2 against whom the charge was that she had married Accused 3 during the subsistence of her valid marriage to P.W.1(2) Accused I who is the father of Accused 2(3) Accused 3 who is the second husband of Accused 2 and (4) Accused 4 a third party who was proceeded against on the ground that along with Accused 1 and 3, he had abetted the commission of the offence by Accused 2. In an elaborate judgment the legal question as to whether a Muslim wife can validly divorce her husband was considered by the learned Judge. He arrived at the conclusion that before Accused 2 went through a form of marriage with Accused 3 her marriage to her first husband (P.W.1) had been legally dissolved by her without going to a Court of law. The learned Public Prosecutor who argued this appeal before us stated that the only point that arose for determination was as to whether the view taken by the Court below, that a Muslim woman, belonging to the Shaffi School as Accused 2 is proved to be, can dissolve her marriage to her husband on the ground that he is not able to maintain her or that he has been maintaining her for a considerable length of time. The fact, that he has not been maintaining her for a long time has not been disputed. In the judgment of the Court below, in Para 20, the learned judge states as follows: "I have little doubt that the complainant had neglected to maintain Accused 2 for a long time while she was residing with her father." In Tyabji's book on 'Principles of Muhamedan Law', S. 205 it is stated that under the Shaffi Law, a marriage may be annulled subject to S. 207, which does not apply to the present case, by the wife without the intervention of the Court on the ground of the husband's inability to maintain her. This authority supports the view taken by the learned Sessions Judge that a Shaffi wife, in the circumstances mentioned in the judgment where the husband has been neglecting to maintain her for a long time, has got the power of separating herself from that husband without the intervention of a Court of law. There is no other authority cited by the learned Public Prosecutor which shows that this legal position is not tenable. All that he can say is that no other text book writers have referred to a similar right which is vested in a Muslim wife. But in view of the state of law, prevailing here on the subject at present, we are not prepared to say that the view taken by the Court below is erroneous. As a matter of fact, the Sessions Judge has found that the marriage of Accused 2 to her first husband has been validly dissolved. If it has been validly dissolved, then in going through a form of marriage with Accused 3, no offence was committed by Accused 2. 2. The learned Public Prosecutor states that it is in the interest of the Muslim population of this State that he was prompted to advise the Government to prefer these appeals. There is a better remedy open to the Government and that is to resort to legislation as has been done outside the State. The Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act 8 of 1939 which extends to the Courts of what was formerly known as British India and now the Indian Union, is the statute applicable to Muslims outside the Travancore-Cochin State. If the Government desire to regulate marital relationship with special reference to the rights of wives, among the Muslim population of the State, the proper procedure to adopt would be to introduce legislation on these lines. The appeals are dismissed in view of the fact that we are not satisfied that there is any error of law in the judgment of the trial Court. No other points are raised or pressed in this appeal. Appeal dismissed.