V. Dhanapalan, J.

1. The petitioner is the mother of the detenu. The detenu has been branded as a "Goonda" under the Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982 and detained under the order of the 2nd respondent passed in Memo No.890/BDFGISSV/2013, dated 03.09.2013.

2. The detenu came to adverse notice in the following cases:-

Sl.No. Police Station and Crime No. Sections of Law

1 P-4 Basin Bridge Police Station Crime No.03/2013 302 IPC @ 120 (b), 341, 302 r/w 34 IPC

2 P-1 Pulianthope Police Station Crime No.1425/2013 294(b), 385, 506(ii) IPC

The ground case alleged against the detenu is one registered on 22.08.2013 by the Inspector of Police, P-4 Basin Bridge Police Station in Crime No.638/2013 for offences under Sections 341, 294(b), 392 r/w 397, 506(ii) IPC.

3. Though the learned counsel for the petitioner has raised several other grounds to assail the order of detention, he mainly focused his arguments on the ground that there is variation in translation of the remand order dated 22.08.2013 annexed in pages 54 and 55 of the booklet, which has deprived the detenu in making effective representation to the authorities concerned and therefore, on this sole ground, the detention order is liabl