A divisional bench of the Bombay High Court has directed Russian Zoroastrian Mikhail Chistyakov and Meher Master-Moos to approach a magistrate’s court with their criminal complaint
"On the rival claims and counter claims made by the parties, we do not wish to express any opinion and if the petitioners are keen that their complaint dated February 28, 2010 is investigated into, the appropriate remedy for the petitioners shall be to file a private complaint before the learned JMFC (Judicial Magistrate First Class) at Dahanu or any other court of competent jurisdiction and seek an order either directing investigation under Section 156(3) or for issuance of process under Section 202 of Cr.P.C. (Criminal Procedure Code).
"Hence, the petition is disposed with liberty to file a private complaint,” so noted a divisional bench of justices B. H. Marlapalle and U. D. Salvi of the Bombay High Court (BHC) on July 11, 2011 in the case by Russian Zoroastrian Herbad Mikhail Chistyakov and Meher Master-Moos versus Government of India, Bombay Parsi Punchayet (BPP) chairman Dinshaw Mehta and others.
The petition filed by Master-Moos related to an alleged assault on February 18 and 19, 2010 when some individuals from Surat and Bombay allegedly barged into the Zoroastrian College premises in Sanjan. The intruders reportedly aborted the navar ceremony being performed for Chistyakov to initiate him into the Zoroastrian priesthood. The police were called in and a settlement reached but Chistyakov and Master-Moos alleged she did not voluntarily sign the so-called settlement and "her letter of thanks (to the concerned police officer) is being misconstrued.”
(From l): Mikhail Chistyakov, Meher Master-Moos, Dinshaw Mehta
The judges’ order also states "if any of the petitioners apply for a copy of the station diary of February 18 and 19, 2010, we direct the Inspector of Talasari police station to issue a certified true copy of the same to the petitioners.”
In a letter to Parsiana Master-Moos welcomed the judgement stating that it was an answer to "our sincere prayers and hard work for past whole year to uphold our freedom of conscience, constitutional rights and international human rights…
"In first order dated May 2, 2011 (Justices A. M. Khanwilkar and Mridula Bhatkar of) the BHC… granted us police protection whenever we ask for it. In effect the result of this order is that it clears the way for our (All India Shah Behram Baug) Society to carry on with all our work, with safety of police protection. It means that now we can call Chistyakov to India to continue with his navar and other education, and also other persons like him can come through our Society and to our College, from other countries, for their educational and spiritual upliftment. Nobody can stop us. If anyone dares to interfere in future, it would be violation of our constitutional fundamental rights and international human rights…
"The second order dated July 11 gives us leave to file our private criminal complaints in Dahanu magistrate’s court against the respondents 5-11, the BPP chairman and his… co-conspirators. These were the main two orders we wanted.”
Master-Moos contended "the High Court has not admitted, nor has it dismissed, our petition.” The Times of India of July 11, 2011 had carried a small news item titled, "HC dismisses Russian’s plea.” Instead the Court has accorded the relief they sought, she claimed. She further mentioned "our counsel advocate Bapoo Malcolm discussed the outcome of the... WP (writ petition), and what further action is to be taken in Dahanu magistrate’s court after the High Court order dated July 11… is under consideration.”
She ended her letter thanking all her numerous well-wishers for the support extended.
In response to a text message sent by Parsiana to Mehta on July 19 seeking his reactions to the Court order, he replied, the "High Court has rightly dismissed this frivolous petition and asked her to seek recourse to the normal redressal by a Magistrate. She is clearly reneging on the settlement reached on February 19, 2010 that she will not do any navjotes without adequate proof of the ancestry of the navjotee to the satisfaction of our High Priests. Her claim of enforced settlement is belied by the fact that two days later she buys a "Thank You” card and sends a handwritten and signed thank you letter to the Talasari inspector.”