ORDER : 1. The petitioner is the 1st accused in C.C.No.77/2013 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam. 2. The offences alleged against the petitioner are punishable under Sections 498A, 420, 406 and 34 of the IPC. 3. The petitioner is the husband of the 2nd respondent. The 2nd respondent is the de facto complainant. 4. The prosecution allegation is that the 2nd respondent was subjected to cruelty both physically and mentally by the petitioner demanding more dowry and further misappropriated gold ornaments to clear off the debt incurred by the petitioner and thereby committed the offences. 5. During the investigation, gold ornaments weighing 222.750 gms. were seized. The trial of the case has already been started. The 2nd respondent was partly examined as PW1. The petitioner filed a petition as C.M.P.No.1874/2022 at the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court-II, Kollam to give a direction to the investigating officer to produce the above said gold ornaments at the court below and a prayer was also made to give a copy of certain other documents produced along with the final report. The court below after hearing both sides passed Annexure-6 order whereby the petition was allowed in part and copies of the documents were ordered to be given to the petitioner. However, the prayer to produce the gold ornaments was rejected. Challenging the said order, this Crl.M.C. has been preferred. 6. I have heard Sri.Biju.C.Abraham, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.G.Sudheer, the learned Public Prosecutor. 7. Considering the nature of the order going to be passed, I am of the view that notice need not be issued to the 2nd respondent. 8. The court below found that the gold ornaments seized during the investigation were released to the 2nd respondent. Since the gold ornaments were not in the possession of the investigating agency the court below declined the prayer of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that those gold ornaments are highly necessary to confront with PW1 to substantiate his defence plea. The counsel further submitted that the gold ornaments were released to the 2nd respondent with a specific condition that she shall produce the same as and when directed. The defence has every right to ask for the production of a material object seized during the investigation to substantiate his defence plea. The counsel further submitted that the gold ornaments were released to the 2nd respondent with a specific condition that she shall produce the same as and when directed. The defence has every right to ask for the production of a material object seized during the investigation to substantiate his defence plea. Hence, this Crl.M.C. is disposed of as follows:- (i) The petitioner is at liberty to file an application at the court below to give a direction to the 2nd respondent to produce the gold ornaments. The application shall be filed by the petitioner within a period of one week from today. (ii) The court below after hearing both sides shall dispose of the said application in accordance with law. (iii) Further cross-examination of PW1 shall be deferred till the disposal of the said application.