There is no such thing as mutual respect in real-politik unless you are two opposing poles in a bipolar world. You know that. One gets into talks or alliances based on one's level of strength. Earning respect is a cliche, agreed, but very true, nonetheless.
That being said, why should India consider Pakistan on a mutual respect basis? You talk about India sponsored disturbances in Baloachistan and apparently FATA/NWFP and that 'Nabka' in '71. However you conveniently forget the role Pakistan has been playing in India since beginning with incursions in Kashmir in '48 all the way to back stabbing in Kargil in '99 - at the very same moment when Vajpayee was shaking hands with Nawaz on the Indo-Pak boder under the angry glare of Mush, and all the LoC roe violations to push in militants.
When one cannot trust Pakistani authorities (either due to their arrogance or apparent incompetence to control 'rouge' elements within) where does the question of mutual respect arise?
Being the aggrieved party over the years, and stomaching all the terrorist activities sponsored by some elements in Pakistan (which your authorities cannot control) India today with her economic and conventional military clout is in a position to dictate terms to Pakistan. And dictate she will! Contrary to your nationalistic pride and ego, people in authority (they are there in those positions for a reason) in Pakistan do understand the reality of real-politik and will be swayed as the current flows.
In every relationship, there's always the one who wears the pants. Now if both insist on wearing the pants, there's gonna be trouble, now we don't want THAT do we? Given the ground realities today, Pakistan is in no position to wear pants.
India will respect Pakistan only when Pakistan realizes where she really stands.