The passport was issued in the name of Riyasat Ali Khushi Mohammad and bore Jundal’s photograph.
Mumbai: After a gap of more than a year, trial in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks has resumed with prosecution beginning examination of witnesses against lone accused, Zabiuddin Ansari alias Abu Jundal. According to prosecution, Jundal was one of the handlers of those who carried out attacks in Mumbai and was present and directing perpetrators of the attacks from a temporary control room set up in Karachi, Pakistan.
Pakistani-American Lashkar-e-Tayyaba (LeT) terrorist David Coleman Headley was the first witness in this case who deposed in February 2016 before a special court in Mumbai via video-conferencing from an undisclosed location in the US.
At the time, he told the court how top LeT leadership along with officials from Pakistan’s Directorate of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) had conspired to execute the Mumbai terror attacks in November 2008 which killed 166 persons and injured 309 others.After Headley’s deposition, no new witness was called until earlier this month.
Special public prosecutor Ujjwal Nikam has now examined five more witnesses, including an official translator who translated details mentioned in Urdu in the Pakistani passport allegedly seized from Jundal at the time of his arrest.
The passport was issued in the name of Riyasat Ali Khushi Mohammad and bore Jundal’s photograph. After him, the court has started calling police officers who registered different complaints with regard to attacks at different places.
The officers include one who filed a complaint with regard to murder of fishermen in the boat Kuber that was hijacked by the terrorists and used to reach and enter Mumbai; and one who registered a complaint about firing and lobbing of bombs at Chhatrapati Shivaji Terminus (CST).
Summons has also been issued to ACP Manishi Chandra from Delhi to depose aswitness in court. This officer had seized passport and other documents from Jundal at the time of his arrest. Deposition of this witness has been delayed as some of the original documents are lying with the Delhi high court and this officer has been asked to appear before the court with those documents.