with the consent of a candidate or his election agent any assistance (other than the giving of vote) for the furtherance of the prospects of the candidate's election from any person in the service of the Government and belonging to any of the classes specified therein. It is in my opinion, essential that at the time the impugned act, namely: the obtaining or procuring or abetting or attempting to obtain or procure the assistance of a Government servant is done, the person doing the act must be a candidate or his agent or any other person with the consent of a candidate or his election agent. Candidate in this clause would mean a person who has been or who claims to have been duly nominated as a candidate at the election I am unable to accede to the submission of Mr. Shanti Bhushan that the word “candidate” has been used merely to identify the person who is duly nominated as a candidate at an election and that the word “candidate”, as mentioned in clause (7), would also include a person who, after the commission of the corrupt practice specified in that clause, is subsequently nominated as a candidate. The amended definition reproduced above shows that unless context otherwise requires, candidate means a person who has been or claims to have been duly nominated as a candidate at an election. To accede to the submission of Mr. Shanti Bhushan would be tantamount to reading in the definition of the word “Candidate” in addition to the words “who has been or claims to have been duly nominated” also the words “who is subsequently nominated as a candidate”. There is nothing to indicate that the word “candidate” in clause (7) of Section 123 has been used merely to identify the person who has been or would be subsequently nominated as a candidate. A definition clause in a statute is a legislative device with a view to avoid making different provisions of the statute to be cumbersome. Where a word is defined in the statute and that word is used in a provision to which that definition is applicable, the effect is that wherever the word defined is used in that provision, the definition of the word gets substituted. Reading the word “candidate” in Section 123(7) of the RP Act in the sense in which it has been defined as a result of the amendment made by Act 40 of 1975. I find that the only reasonable inference is that the person referred to as a candiidate in that clause should be a person who has been or claims to have been duly nominated as a candidate at an election and not one who is yet to be nominated. 219. Mr. Shanti Bhushan has invited our attention to clause (b) of Section 100 (1) of the RP Act where-in it is stated that subject to the provisions of sub-section (2) of the section if the High Court is of the opinion that any corrupt practice has been committed by a returned candidate or his election agent or by any other person with the consent of a returned candidate or his election agent, the High Court shall declare the election of the returned candidate to be void. “Returned candidate” has been defined in clause (f) of Section 79 to mean, unless the context otherwise requires, a candidate whose name has been published under Section 67 as duly elected. It is urged that as the corrupt practice referred to in clause (b) of Section 100 (1) of the RP Act would in the very nature of things have to be committed by the returned candidate before his name was published under Section 67 as duly elected,