language or the use of, or appeal to religious symbols or the use of or appeal to national symbols such as the national flag or the national emblem, for the furtherance of the prospects of the election of that candidate or for prejudicially affecting the election of any candidate.’’ It is the common case of the parties that the symbol of cow and calf was allotted to the Congress party by the Election Commission. The learned counsel for the respondent stated during the course of arguments in the High Court that he confined his case only to the use of the symbol of cow and calf. The learned counsel gave up that part of the case of the respondent wherein it had been alleged that appeals were made to the religious symbol of cow and calf by the appellant. The following proviso has now been inserted in clause (3) of Section 123 by Section 8 of Act 40 of 1975: ‘‘Provided that no symbol allotted under this Act to a candidate shall be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol for the purposes of this clause.’’ It is, therefore apparent in view of the above proviso that the symbol of cow and calf which was allotted to the appellant shall not be deemed to be a religious symbol or a national symbol for the purpose of Section 123(3) of the RP Act. The appellant as such cannot be deemed to have committed a corrupt practice under Section 123(2) of the RP Act by use of the symbol of cow and calf. 226. In assailing the validity of Act 40 of 1975 Mr. Shanti Bhushan has referred to Section 10 of that Act, according to which the amendments made by Sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Act in the RP Act shall have retrospective operation, so as to apply to any election held before the commencement of the Act in respect of which an election petition is pending or in respect of which appeal from any order of the High Court is pending immediately before the commencement of Act 40 of 1975. It is urged that a change in the election law with retrospective effect strikes at the principle of free and fair elections. Retrospective operation of the amending Act, according to the learned counsel, has the effect of condoning what was at the time it was committed a corrupt practice. 227. I have given the matter my earnest consideration, and am of the opinion that there is no substance in the above contention. A legislature has except in a matter for which there is prohibition like the one contained in Article 20 (1) of the Constitution the power to make laws which are prospective in operation as well as laws which have retrospective operation. There is no limitation on the power of the legislature in this respect. Essentially it is a matter relating to the capacity and competence of the legislature. Although most of the laws made by the legislature have a prospective operation, occasions arise quite often when necessity is felt of giving retrospective effect to a law. This holds good both in respect of a principal Act as well as in respect of an amending Act. If the provisions of an Act passed by the legislature are not violative of the provisions of the Constitution, those provisions shall have to be given effect to and the fact