measures taken to protect the person of the holder of the office when electioneering as though the Prime Minister and the candidate were two different persons. He was unable to see that so long as the person was the same the distinction between the two capacities or personae for the purposes for which facilities were given and protection provided, was both factually as well as legally impossible and quite immaterial. 468. I also think that the learned Judge erred in holding that such a case could be one of solication of official aid and assistance at all. It is a case in which certain precautions are taken and arrangements made almost "automatically", if one may use this word here by officers of the State as a matter of duty towards the office held by a candidate who undoubtedly enjoys certain advantages which an ordinary candidate cannot have. It is as futile to complain of such a distinction made as it is to complain that a candidate possesses certain advantages at an election because of the personal services rendered to the country or distinctions achieved by the candidate. Again, there are advantages which attach themselves to a candidate because of that candidate's personal qualities, qualifications, capacities or background. The appurtenances of office or distinctions achieved are in my opinion, comparable to such personal advantages in so far as they are not enjoyed because they are "obtained" or "procured". If such a result in law in unfair, it is not for Courts to find a remedy by accepting the argument advanced before us also : that those who enjoy the benefits of office must be made to realize and suffer some of its handicaps. This clearly means the benefit which law gives, without solicitation by the candidate must be converted, by a judicial fiat, into a disadvantage and a handicap. It is for Parliament to step in and change the law if an alteration of it is considered necessary by it. The only change that need be made in the law if that could be the legislative intent is to provide that the holder of any office for the time being would not be qualified to stand at an election. In that event holders of all Ministerial Offices will have to resign before they offer themselves as candidates. But such is not our law found in the 1951 Act or anywhere else. I think that it would be extending the scope of S. 123(7) too wide to hold that the facilities automatically provided by the State to the Prime Minister by virtue of his or her office are also struck by a provision directed against soliciation of official aid and assistance by candidates. 469. The learned Judge had mentioned a Division Bench decision of the Allahabad High Court in Motilal v. Mangla Prasad AIR 1958 All 794 at P. 797 where it was laid down : "We think that the word 'obtain' in Section 123(7) has been used in the essence of the meaning which connotes purpose behind the action of the candidate. The word has not been used in the sub-section in the sense of a mere passive receipt of assistance without the candidate even being conscious of the fact that the assistance has been rendered. In order to bring the case under sub-section (7), it must be shown that the candidate did make some effort or perform some purposeful act in order to get the assistance."