SUKUMARAN, J.

The statutory favour of Flavoured Milk as that term is employed in the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1955 comes up for determination by the Full Bench. The issue has arisen in two food adulteration cases, one from Neyyattinkara and the other from Ottappalam. Different Judges of this Court have differently reacted; the conflict is reflected in the differing approaches and conclusions reached by the courts below, in almost similar situations. The accused were convicted in one case but acquitted in another. Subsequent to the judgments in the two cases, this Court pronounced on the identical point in Food Inspector v. Aboobacker, 1986 Ker LT 1117. It was held that rose milk is not milk or flavoured milk, that no standards have been prescribed for rose milk, and that prosecution based on adulteration for the short fall in standards cannot succeed. The correctness of the decision was doubted by other Judges and accordingly the question has come up in reference before the Full Bench.

2. Crl. Appeal No. 159 of 1986 is by the Food Inspector, challenging the acquittal made by the Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Ottappalam in S.T. No. 613 of 1984 by which th