ORDER : M.M. SUNDRESH, J. The petitioner is the sister of the detenu, namely, Puthiyamuthu, son of Arumugam, Male, aged about 48 years. The detenu has been detained by the second respondent, by his order in No.11/BCDFGISSSV/2017, dated 27.02.2017, holding him to be a "Goonda", as contemplated under Section 2(f) of Tamil Nadu Act 14 of 1982. The said order is under challenge in this Habeas Corpus Petition. 2. Though several grounds have been raised in the Habeas Corpus Petition, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, confines his argument only in respect of non-application of mind on the part of the sponsoring authority in referring the name of the detenu in page No.247 of the copies furnished to the detenu. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that there is non-application of mind as in page No.247 of the documents furnished to the detenu, the sponsoring authority has referred him as K. Muthukrishnan as against his name, Puthiyamuthu. 4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, while reiterating the averments made in the counter affidavit, would submit that the order of detention has been passed on cogent and sufficient materials and the same cannot be interfered with at the instance of the petitioner. 5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents. We have also perused the records produced by the Detaining Authority. 6. There appears clear non-application of mind even with respect to the name of the detenu in referring his name in page No.247 of the copies furnished to the detenu. Thus, we are of the view that there is a non-application of mind. 7. Considering the submissions made on both sides, we are of the view that there is non-application of mind on the part of the detaining authority in passing the order. In such view of the matter, the impugned detention order is liable to be quashed. 8. In the result, the Habeas Corpus Petition is allowed and the order of detention in No.11/BCDFGISSSV/2017, dated 27.02.2017, passed by the second respondent is set aside. The detenu, namely, Puthiyamuthu, son of Arumugam, aged about 48 years, is directed to be released forthwith unless his detention is required in connection with any other case.