THE LEGAL BRIDGE

thelegalbridge.in

Grounds for Divorce — Desertion and Conversion

Topic 18 | Module 2: Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 | The Legal Bridge

For Judicial Service Aspirants: RJS | DJS | PCS-J | HJS | APO

Comprehensive Study Notes with Landmark Case Laws, Mnemonics & Exam Tips

Grounds for Divorce — Desertion and Conversion

Relevant Provisions: Section 13(1)(ib) Desertion | Section 13(1)(ii) Conversion | Hindu Marriage Act, 1955

Priority: VERY HIGH | Exam Relevance: RJS / DJS / PCS-J / HJS / University Exams (FREQUENTLY TESTED)

1. Introduction

Desertion and conversion are two important fault-based grounds for divorce under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. Each addresses a fundamentally different kind of matrimonial failure. Desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) deals with one spouse's ABANDONMENT of the matrimonial relationship — physical separation coupled with intention to permanently end cohabitation. Conversion under Section 13(1)(ii) deals with one spouse's CHANGE OF RELIGION — ceasing to be a Hindu by converting to a non-Hindu religion.

Desertion was originally a ground only for judicial separation under the unamended HMA. It was elevated to an INDEPENDENT ground for divorce by the Marriage Laws (Amendment) Act, 1976 — the same amendment that made cruelty an independent divorce ground. The 1976 Amendment also substantially liberalised Hindu divorce law by reducing the statutory separation period and simplifying the requirements. Desertion has a long common-law history and has generated extensive case law — including the foundational Supreme Court decision in Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati (1957), which established the classical definition of desertion as comprising both factum (physical separation) and animus deserendi (intention to desert).

Conversion, by contrast, is a ground peculiar to religion-based personal law systems. Hindu marriage, as governed by HMA, is available only to Hindus (and persons treated as Hindus under S.2). When one spouse converts to a non-Hindu religion, the foundation of the Hindu marriage is shaken. The Supreme Court in Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995) and Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2000) delivered landmark rulings clarifying that mere conversion does NOT automatically dissolve a Hindu marriage — the converted spouse must still seek divorce under HMA. These cases have profoundly shaped the interpretation of S.13(1)(ii) and its relationship with the monogamy rule under S.5(i).

Both grounds are FREQUENTLY TESTED in judicial services examinations. Questions focus on: the essentials of desertion (factum + animus), the continuous 2-year period, constructive desertion, bars to desertion, the definition of 'ceased to be Hindu,' the distinction between conversion and mere practice of another religion, and the landmark cases. A thorough understanding is essential.

2. GROUND 3: DESERTION — Section 13(1)(ib)

2.1 Text of Section 13(1)(ib)

Section 13(1)(ib) HMA provides that either spouse may seek divorce on the ground that the other party:

"has deserted the petitioner for a continuous period of not less than two years immediately preceding the presentation of the petition."

2.2 Explanation to Section 13

The Explanation to Section 13 provides an important statutory definition:

"In this sub-section, the expression 'desertion' means the desertion of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage without reasonable cause and without the consent or against the wish of such party, and includes the wilful neglect of the petitioner by the other party to the marriage, and its grammatical variations and cognate expressions shall be construed accordingly."

2.3 Essentials of Desertion

Based on the statutory definition and judicial interpretation (particularly Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati), desertion requires proof of FOUR essential elements — two on the deserting spouse's side and two on the deserted spouse's side:

2.4 Elements on the Deserting Spouse's Side

1. FACTUM of separation: The deserting spouse must have PHYSICALLY SEPARATED from the petitioner — i.e., the matrimonial cohabitation must have come to an end. Physical separation is the objective, observable element.
2. ANIMUS DESERENDI (intention to desert): The deserting spouse must have the INTENTION to PERMANENTLY END the matrimonial cohabitation — to bring the consortium to an end for all time, or at least for an indefinite period. This is the subjective, mental element.

2.5 Elements on the Deserted Spouse's Side

1. Absence of CONSENT: The separation must have occurred WITHOUT the consent of the petitioner. If both parties agreed to live separately (e.g., by mutual arrangement), there is no desertion.
2. Absence of REASONABLE CAUSE: The desertion must be WITHOUT reasonable cause — i.e., the deserting spouse cannot have been justified in leaving by the petitioner's conduct (which would constitute constructive desertion by the petitioner).

2.6 Continuous Period of 2 Years

The statutory period is TWO YEARS of continuous desertion IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING the filing of the petition. Key aspects:

• Continuous: The 2 years must be uninterrupted. A brief resumption of cohabitation may interrupt the running of the period.
• Immediately preceding: The period must end at (or just before) the filing of the divorce petition. Desertion from 10 years ago, followed by 8 years of cohabitation, then no separation, cannot support a petition.
• Before 1976 amendment: The required period was 2 years for divorce (under S.13 as it stood), and it had been inherited from the earlier 3-year period for judicial separation.
• Proof of continuity: The petitioner must prove that the desertion continued throughout the 2-year period without resumption.

2.7 Types of Desertion

2.7.1 Actual Desertion (Simple Desertion)

The classical case — one spouse physically leaves the matrimonial home with intention to permanently end cohabitation, without consent and without reasonable cause.

2.7.2 Constructive Desertion

A spouse is CONSTRUCTIVELY DESERTED when the other spouse's conduct makes it impossible or unreasonable for him/her to continue living in the matrimonial home, and forces him/her to leave. Here, the spouse who physically remains may in fact be the 'deserter' in the eyes of law.

Example: Husband's cruelty forces wife to leave. In law, the HUSBAND has deserted the wife, not the wife deserting the husband — because the husband's conduct caused the physical separation. The wife can sue the husband for divorce on the ground of his constructive desertion.

Constructive desertion is a crucial doctrine — it prevents the cruel or wrongdoing spouse from hiding behind the fact that the other spouse physically left. The law looks to the REAL CAUSE of the separation.

2.7.3 Willful Neglect

The Explanation to S.13 specifically includes 'wilful neglect' within desertion. A spouse who, while physically present, completely neglects the other — refusing to perform marital duties, refusing to communicate, treating the spouse as a stranger — may be guilty of desertion even without physical separation. This is sometimes called 'desertion by willful neglect.'

2.7.4 Mutual Separation — NOT Desertion

If both spouses agree to live separately (e.g., in a formal separation agreement, or through mutual arrangement), this is NOT desertion. Desertion requires absence of consent on the part of the petitioner. If petitioner consented to the separation, the ground fails.

2.8 Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati (1957) — Foundational Case

The Supreme Court in Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati (AIR 1957 SC 176) laid down the foundational definition of desertion that has been followed ever since. Key holdings:

1. Two essential elements: (a) the FACTUM of separation; and (b) the ANIMUS DESERENDI (intention to desert).
2. Animus must be established: Mere physical separation is not enough. The intention to permanently end cohabitation must be proved.
3. Burden on petitioner: The petitioner bears the burden of proving both factum and animus.
4. Constructive desertion recognised: One spouse's conduct may amount to desertion even though the other spouse physically leaves.
5. Animus can form later: The intention to desert can be formed at the time of leaving or later. If originally leaving with intention to return, but later formed intention not to return, desertion begins from the time of such intention.

2.9 Reasonable Cause — Defences Against Desertion

The deserting spouse may justify his/her departure by showing REASONABLE CAUSE. If reasonable cause is established, there is no desertion. Recognised reasonable causes:

1. Cruelty by petitioner: If the petitioner's cruelty forced the spouse to leave.
2. Adultery by petitioner: If the petitioner committed adultery, the other spouse may have reasonable cause to leave.
3. Threats to safety: Credible threats to life or safety.
4. Dowry harassment: Persistent dowry demands or harassment.
5. Venereal disease: Petitioner's communicable venereal disease.
6. Refusal of matrimonial home: Petitioner's refusal to provide a suitable home or insisting on unsuitable arrangements.
7. Employment/Education: Temporary absence for employment, education, or similar legitimate reasons — but there must be genuine reason, not a pretext for desertion.

2.10 Animus Can Be Inferred

The intention to desert is a state of mind and rarely admitted by the deserting spouse. Courts INFER animus from surrounding circumstances:

• Refusal to respond to letters or messages.
• Refusal to return despite requests.
• Starting separate life — new job, new residence, new relationships.
• Removal of personal effects from matrimonial home.
• Statements to family, friends, or in social media.
• Contracting another relationship (though this may also be adultery).

2.11 Termination of Desertion

Desertion continues until one of the following events:

1. Resumption of cohabitation: If the parties resume matrimonial cohabitation, desertion ends. If resumption is brief or superficial, it may not break the desertion period.
2. Offer to return (bona fide): A genuine offer by the deserting spouse to return, if refused by the other spouse, may convert the position — the refusing spouse may then be in desertion.
3. Consent by petitioner: If petitioner subsequently consents to separation, desertion ends.
4. Death of either spouse: Ends the marriage and thus the desertion.
5. Filing of petition: Desertion must subsist UP TO and INCLUDING the filing of petition — otherwise the 2-year period requirement fails.

2.12 Savitri Pandey v. Prem Chandra Pandey (2002)

The Supreme Court in Savitri Pandey v. Prem Chandra Pandey (AIR 2002 SC 591) gave an important modern interpretation of desertion. The Court held:

• Desertion means intentional permanent forsaking and abandonment of one spouse by the other without the other's consent and without reasonable cause.
• The deserted spouse must be innocent of the conduct that led to separation.
• Courts must consider the totality of circumstances.
• The burden of proof on the petitioner is particularly heavy given the serious nature of the charge.

2.13 Landmark Cases on Desertion

⚖️ Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati AIR 1957 SC 176

Ratio: FOUNDATIONAL CASE. The Supreme Court laid down the classical definition of desertion — requiring both FACTUM (physical separation) and ANIMUS DESERENDI (intention to desert). The Court recognised constructive desertion — where one spouse's conduct forces the other to leave. The deserting spouse's animus must continue throughout the statutory period. This case is the DEFINITIVE authority on desertion in Indian law and is cited in virtually every subsequent decision on the topic.

⚖️ Savitri Pandey v. Prem Chandra Pandey AIR 2002 SC 591

Ratio: Modern landmark on desertion. Supreme Court: 'Desertion means the intentional permanent forsaking and abandonment of one spouse by the other without the other's consent and without reasonable cause.' Both factum and animus must continue for the entire 2-year period. Isolated instances do not constitute desertion.

⚖️ Lachman Utamchand Kirpalani v. Meena AIR 1964 SC 40

Ratio: Classic case. Supreme Court held that even if physical separation was initially voluntary or temporary, animus deserendi may form later. From the time animus forms, desertion begins. Animus can be inferred from conduct and circumstances, not just express statements.

⚖️ Sunil Kumar v. Usha AIR 1991 All 129

Ratio: Allahabad HC held that in desertion cases, the petitioner must show that cohabitation ended, the ending was without consent, without reasonable cause, and was intended to be permanent by the deserter. Mere temporary absence for employment or illness is not desertion.

⚖️ Adhyatma Bhattar Alwar v. Adhyatma Bhattar Sri Devi AIR 2002 SC 88

Ratio: On constructive desertion. The Court held that where one spouse's persistent cruel conduct made matrimonial life impossible, and the other spouse left as a consequence, the first spouse is the constructive deserter. The spouse physically leaving is not the deserter.

⚖️ Geeta Jagdish Mangtani v. Jagdish Mangtani (2005) 8 SCC 177

Ratio: Supreme Court held that mere departure of wife due to discord does not amount to desertion unless animus deserendi is proved. There must be evidence showing the intention to permanently end cohabitation.

⚖️ Malathi Ravi v. B.V. Ravi (2014) 7 SCC 640

Ratio: Desertion requires both factum and animus to continue throughout the period. If animus ceases at any time during the statutory period, the ground fails. Offer to return, if genuine and bona fide, may end desertion.

3. GROUND 4: CONVERSION — Section 13(1)(ii)

3.1 Text of Section 13(1)(ii)

Section 13(1)(ii) HMA provides that either spouse may seek divorce on the ground that the other party:

"has ceased to be a Hindu by conversion to another religion."

3.2 Essentials of Conversion

1. Ceased to be a Hindu: The respondent must no longer be a Hindu in the legal sense.
2. By conversion: The ceasing to be Hindu must be by CONVERSION to another religion — not by mere loss of faith or neglect of religious practice.
3. To another religion: The conversion must be TO another religion — i.e., the person has adopted a non-Hindu religion.

3.3 Meaning of 'Hindu'

For purposes of S.13(1)(ii), a person is 'Hindu' if they fall within the scope of S.2(1) HMA — i.e., a Hindu by religion (in any of its forms), or a Buddhist, Jain, or Sikh by religion, or any other person domiciled in India who is not a Muslim, Christian, Parsi, or Jew. Recall that the legislative fiction under S.2(3) treats these persons as Hindus for the Act's purposes.

Therefore, a person who converts from Hinduism to:

• Islam — has ceased to be Hindu. Ground available.
• Christianity — has ceased to be Hindu. Ground available.
• Judaism or Zoroastrianism — has ceased to be Hindu. Ground available.
• Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism — has NOT ceased to be 'Hindu' within meaning of HMA (these are covered under S.2(1)(b)). Ground NOT available.

3.4 Meaning of Conversion

Conversion under S.13(1)(ii) requires a CONSCIOUS AND DELIBERATE change of religion. It typically involves:

• Formal conversion ceremony: Such as reciting the Kalima and embracing Islam; baptism into Christianity; acceptance into another religious community.
• Renunciation of Hindu religion: The convert abandons Hindu religious beliefs and practices.
• Adoption of new religion: The convert adopts and follows the tenets of the new religion.
• Social and communal affiliation: The convert is accepted into the new religious community.

3.5 What Does NOT Constitute Conversion

• Mere loss of faith without formal conversion.
• Adopting atheism or agnosticism (though some High Courts have views to contrary in specific contexts).
• Respect or study of other religions without conversion.
• Participation in non-Hindu religious ceremonies as courtesy or cultural activity.
• Marriage to a non-Hindu without conversion.
• Taking a non-Hindu name without formal conversion.
• Temporary conversion that is not accepted by the new religious community.

The key is a GENUINE, FORMAL change of religion — not just behavior inconsistent with Hindu religious practice.

3.6 No Additional Period Required

UNLIKE desertion (which requires 2 years) or some other grounds (with specific durations), S.13(1)(ii) requires NO ADDITIONAL PERIOD. As soon as the spouse has ceased to be Hindu by conversion, the ground is available. The petitioner can file immediately (subject to the 1-year bar under S.14 from date of marriage).

3.7 Conversion and Monogamy — Sarla Mudgal and Lily Thomas

A critical issue that arose in Indian law was: when a Hindu man CONVERTS to Islam and then MARRIES ANOTHER WOMAN (taking advantage of Islam's permission of polygamy), what is the status of his first Hindu marriage and second Muslim marriage?

3.8 Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India (1995)

In this landmark case, the Supreme Court decisively ruled on the issue:

1. First Hindu marriage SUBSISTS: Mere conversion of the Hindu husband to Islam does NOT automatically dissolve the Hindu marriage. The Hindu marriage continues until dissolved by a court decree under HMA.
2. Second marriage is VOID: Any marriage contracted by the converted husband during the subsistence of the Hindu marriage is VOID under S.11 HMA (violation of S.5(i) — monogamy).
3. Criminal liability: The husband is liable for BIGAMY under S.494 IPC (now BNS equivalent).
4. Conversion does not override HMA: A Hindu cannot escape HMA's monogamy requirement by converting to Islam. The HMA binds him as long as his first marriage subsists.

3.9 Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2000)

The Supreme Court in Lily Thomas REAFFIRMED and STRENGTHENED Sarla Mudgal. The Court emphatically held that:

• Conversion does NOT dissolve the earlier marriage.
• The earlier marriage can only be dissolved through the procedures of the Act under which it was solemnised.
• Any attempt to use conversion to contract a second marriage is bigamy — punishable under S.494 IPC.
• The non-converting wife can seek divorce under S.13(1)(ii) HMA if she wishes, but the Hindu marriage itself subsists until such divorce.
• The strong policy reasons — prevent abuse of religious freedom, protect monogamy, protect deceived women.

3.10 Effects of Conversion on the Converted Spouse

The conversion has several immediate legal effects on the converting spouse:

1. First marriage remains intact: Per Sarla Mudgal, the converted spouse is still married to the first spouse until divorce decree.
2. Cannot contract second marriage: Any second marriage during subsistence of first is void and bigamous.
3. Subjected to divorce action: The non-converted spouse can file for divorce under S.13(1)(ii) immediately on conversion.
4. Personal law change (for future): For FUTURE matters (new marriage after divorce, succession to parents after conversion, etc.), the converted spouse is governed by the new religion's personal law.
5. Ward of guardianship: Complex issues arise regarding children's guardianship — conversion may affect custody rights.

3.11 Effects on Children

Under S.26 of HAMA (Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956), a converted parent may lose certain rights of guardianship with respect to children who remain Hindu. The Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 and the welfare-of-the-child principle also come into play. Courts in custody matters consider the religious upbringing of the child and the welfare principle.

3.12 Inheritance Rights

Under S.26 of HSA (Hindu Succession Act, 1956), a Hindu who has ceased to be Hindu by conversion loses inheritance rights as a Hindu heir. The converted person's DESCENDANTS (children born after conversion who are not brought up as Hindus) also lose inheritance under this provision. However, the converted person's Hindu descendants born before or brought up as Hindus retain their Hindu inheritance rights.

3.13 Landmark Cases on Conversion

⚖️ Sarla Mudgal v. Union of India AIR 1995 SC 1531

Ratio: LANDMARK CASE. Four Hindu husbands converted to Islam and contracted second marriages while their first Hindu marriages subsisted. The Supreme Court held: (1) Conversion does NOT dissolve the first Hindu marriage; (2) Second marriage is VOID under S.11 HMA; (3) Converted husband is liable for bigamy under S.494 IPC; (4) Conversion cannot be used to escape HMA's monogamy rule. The Court also recommended uniform civil code under Article 44. Major judicial intervention against abuse of personal law.

⚖️ Lily Thomas v. Union of India (2000) 6 SCC 224

Ratio: REAFFIRMED Sarla Mudgal. The Supreme Court categorically held that Hindu marriage subsists until dissolved under HMA. Conversion does not by itself dissolve a Hindu marriage. Second marriage after conversion is bigamous. The Court strongly rejected the argument that conversion to Islam should automatically allow polygamy. Emphasised protection of women's rights and prevention of abuse of religious freedom.

⚖️ Munavvar-ul-Islam v. Rishu Arora AIR 2014 Del 130

Ratio: Delhi HC applying Sarla Mudgal and Lily Thomas. A Hindu wife converted to Islam. She could not claim that the Hindu marriage stood automatically dissolved. Her Hindu husband retained the right to seek divorce under S.13(1)(ii). The Hindu marriage continued to be governed by HMA until dissolved per HMA procedures.

⚖️ John Jiban Chandra Datta v. Abinash Chandra Sen AIR 1939 Cal 417

Ratio: Classic pre-HMA case. Held that conversion from Hinduism to Christianity amounted to religious change of status. The principle applies under HMA — conversion from Hindu religion to a non-Hindu religion (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Zoroastrianism) makes person 'cease to be Hindu' within S.13(1)(ii).

⚖️ Abdur Rahim Undre v. Padma Abdur Rahim Undre AIR 1982 Bom 341

Ratio: Bombay HC discussed the effect of conversion on matrimonial rights. Conversion does not automatically end the existing marriage. The non-converted spouse has the CHOICE — to seek divorce under personal law of the converted spouse's original religion, or to continue the marriage.

⚖️ Chandra Shekhar Prasad v. Smt Bimla Devi AIR 1985 Del 221

Ratio: Reiterated that conversion does not automatically dissolve a Hindu marriage. The converting spouse cannot unilaterally terminate the marriage by conversion. The marriage remains subsisting and can be dissolved only through court decree under HMA.

⚖️ Vilayat Raj v. Smt Sunila AIR 1983 Del 351

Ratio: On conversion back to Hinduism (RECONVERSION). If a converted person comes back to Hinduism, they are treated as Hindu once again. However, this does not undo the legal consequences of the earlier conversion — e.g., if the first marriage was dissolved under S.13(1)(ii) following conversion, the subsequent reconversion does not revive that marriage.

4. CONVERSION AS GROUND — PROCEDURAL ASPECTS

4.1 Who Can File

Under S.13(1)(ii), the ground is available only to the NON-CONVERTED SPOUSE. The spouse who has converted cannot himself/herself use the conversion as a ground for divorce — that would be taking advantage of one's own act (barred by S.23(1)(a)).

4.2 Evidence of Conversion

The petitioner must prove the conversion. Acceptable evidence:

• Formal certificate of conversion from the religious authority (e.g., Shahada in Islam, Baptism certificate in Christianity).
• Registration with the new religious community.
• Public announcement or declaration.
• Evidence of conversion ceremony — photographs, witnesses.
• Adoption of new name indicating new religion.
• Changing religion in official documents (passport, identity cards).
• Admission by the converted spouse in writing or orally.
• Social conduct consistent with new religion — observance of new religious practices.

4.3 Burden of Proof

The burden of proving conversion lies on the PETITIONER. The petitioner must establish:

1. The respondent was originally a Hindu.
2. The respondent has ceased to be Hindu.
3. The ceasing is by conversion (not mere loss of faith).
4. The conversion is to another religion.

5. DESERTION vs. CONVERSION — COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

6. IMPORTANT POINTS FOR EXAM REVISION

1. Desertion — S.13(1)(ib): Desertion for continuous 2 years immediately preceding petition.
2. Definition (Explanation to S.13): Without reasonable cause, without consent/against wish, includes wilful neglect.
3. Essentials: Factum (physical separation) + Animus deserendi (intention to desert) + 2 years + no consent + no reasonable cause.
4. Key case — Bipin Chander (1957): Classical definition of desertion. Both factum and animus required. Constructive desertion recognised.
5. Types: Actual desertion, constructive desertion, wilful neglect.
6. Constructive desertion: When one spouse's conduct forces the other to leave — the first spouse is the constructive deserter.
7. Animus can form later: Lachman v. Meena — from time animus forms, desertion begins.
8. 2-year rule: 1976 Amendment reduced earlier period. Must be continuous, immediately preceding petition.
9. Defences: Consent, reasonable cause, resumption of cohabitation.
10. Conversion — S.13(1)(ii): Respondent ceased to be Hindu by conversion to another religion.
11. No additional period required: Available immediately on conversion.
12. Sarla Mudgal (1995) + Lily Thomas (2000): Conversion does NOT automatically dissolve Hindu marriage. Second marriage after conversion is void and bigamous. Hindu marriage continues until dissolved under HMA.
13. Buddhist, Jain, Sikh — still Hindu: Conversion to these does NOT trigger S.13(1)(ii) because they are covered under HMA per S.2(1)(b).
14. Only non-converted spouse can file: Converting spouse cannot use own conversion as ground.

🧠 MNEMONIC: Desertion Essentials — FAIT

Factum (physical separation), Animus deserendi (intent), IndWithout consent, Two years continuous. F-A-I-T. Plus: no reasonable cause.

🧠 MNEMONIC: Conversion Cases — Remember 'SL'

Sarla Mudgal (1995) and Lily Thomas (2000). Both held: conversion does NOT dissolve Hindu marriage; second marriage is bigamous; Hindu spouse liable under S.494 IPC. Every divorce question on conversion mentions both cases.

🎯 EXAM TIP

Top-tested points: (1) Desertion = factum + animus + 2 years (Bipin Chander, 1957); (2) Constructive desertion — cruel spouse who stays is the real deserter; (3) Wilful neglect covered by Explanation to S.13; (4) Conversion — no additional period required; (5) Sarla Mudgal + Lily Thomas — conversion does NOT dissolve Hindu marriage; (6) Converting to Buddhism/Jainism/Sikhism does NOT trigger S.13(1)(ii).

✨ Essay Strategy

For desertion: (1) Quote S.13(1)(ib) + Explanation; (2) Essentials — factum + animus + 2 years + no consent + no reasonable cause; (3) Types — actual, constructive, wilful neglect; (4) Bipin Chander (1957) as foundation; (5) Reasonable cause defences; (6) Recent case — Savitri Pandey (2002). For conversion: (1) Quote S.13(1)(ii); (2) Meaning of 'ceased to be Hindu'; (3) B/J/S not covered; (4) Sarla Mudgal + Lily Thomas as definitive cases; (5) Second marriage after conversion — void + bigamous; (6) No additional period required.

7. PRACTICE QUESTIONS

Q1: Define desertion under Section 13(1)(ib) HMA. What are the essential elements? Discuss with reference to Bipin Chander Jaisinghbhai Shah v. Prabhawati.

Q2: Distinguish between actual desertion and constructive desertion. Can a spouse who physically leaves be the deserted spouse in law? Illustrate with case law.

Q3: A Hindu husband converts to Islam and contracts a second marriage. His first Hindu wife seeks divorce and files a bigamy complaint. Discuss the legal position with reference to Sarla Mudgal and Lily Thomas.

Q4: Discuss conversion as a ground for divorce under Section 13(1)(ii) HMA. What amounts to ceasing to be a Hindu? Does conversion automatically dissolve the marriage?

Q5: A wife leaves the matrimonial home after persistent dowry harassment by her husband and his family. The husband files for divorce alleging desertion by the wife. Can he succeed? Discuss.

Q6: Explain the concept of 'animus deserendi.' How is it proved? Can it be formed after the physical separation?

Q7: 'Conversion to another religion does not dissolve a Hindu marriage.' Discuss this statement with reference to statutory provisions and judicial decisions. What are the legal consequences of conversion?