(1.) This petition for Leave to appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 26.07.2007 passed by the High Court Division in Civil Revision No.1730 of 2006 arising out of judgment and order dated 20.4.2006 passed by District Judge, Pirojpur in Election Appeal No.03/2005 dismissing the appeal and affirming the order No. 30 dated 20.7.2005 gassed by Senior Assistant Judge and Bicharak of the Election Tribunal Case No.06/2003 allowing the application for recounting of ballot papers on contest against the petitioner.
(2.) The respondent No. 1 filed Election Tribunal Case No. 6 of 2003 before the Election Tribunal and Assistant Judge, Mothbaria, Pirojpur impleading the petitioner challenging the election of ward No.6 Tikikata Union Parishad under Mothbaria Upazilla held on 27.1.2003 for the post of member of the said Union Parishad. It was alleged that several candidates contested for the post of member of the Union Parishad in the said election and the election result was declared showing the petitioner to have received 369 votes, the respondent No.1 have received 370 votes and respondent No. 2 got 292 votes, respondent No. 3 got 113 votes, respondent No.4 got 75 votes and respondent No. 5 got 41 votes. It was also alleged that the present respondent No.1 was declared elected by 5 votes but subsequently by manipulation or the presiding officers and other concerned officers the present petitioner was declared elected by a margin of one votes. There are several other allegations including the allegation of rigging, casting of false votes including casting of votes of absentee and dead persons. The respondent No.1 was contesting the election with a symbol "Rickshaw" and the symbol of the petitioner was "Lock and key", the respondent No.1 of the election petition has been contesting the election petition by filing a written objection contending that the election took place peacefully, fairly and there was no rigging of casting of false votes in the names of dead persons.
(3.) The petitioner of the election petition 5 examined 3 P.Ws and the respondent No. 1 of the election petition examined 4 O.P.Ws the petitioner or the election petition filed an application on 07.07.2004 for recounting of ballot papers on the ground that the petitioner has established a proper foundation for recounting of ballot papers. The respondent No.1 of the election petition seriously contested the plea of recounting of ballot papers