Why did India not produce evidence of its own on David Headley?
Investigators have shown a lackluster approach when it comes to David Headley, the Lashkar-e-Tayiba operative who conducted a reconnaissance of the targets at Mumbai in connection with the 26/11 attack.
While it is the National Investigating Agency which is probing the case against Headley, it comes as quite a surprise the Mumbai police never went into this aspect of the case.
A special court in fact took objection and even asked the prosecution why Headley was not made a wanted accused in the case. The special court made these observations while hearing the case against Abu Jundal alias Zabiuddin Ansari who was the Hindi tutor for the ten terrorists who carried out the 26/11 attack.
An application has been filed by the prosecution stating thate Headley must be tried.
The court took serious objection to the fact that the prosecution was relying only on the evidence provided by the US. The court felt that India must have evidence of its own against Headley.
Why are you coming with evidence collected by others the court asked while also questioning the Mumbai police for not investigating the Headley angle to the case.
The Mumbai police which launched the investigation into the 26/11 attack after the capture of Ajmal Kasab was clueless about the existence of David Headley.
It was the Americans who revealed the role of Headley. However Headley struck a plea bargain deal with the US which meant that he shall neither be sentenced to death nor extradited to India.
However the National Investigation Agency which was formed after the 26/11 attack managed to question Headley once in the US. Officers of the NIA returned to India and built a case based on Headley's interrogation.
However Headley did not reveal anything new apart from what he had already told the FBI. India today continues to stick to the evidence against Headley that has been provided by the FBI. Effectively India has not got anything new against Headley.