The petitioner, Lalitha (aged 76), mother of the detenue Rajesh @ Puthenpalam Rajesh, filed a writ petition before the Kerala High Court seeking habeas corpus and certiorari against a preventive detention order issued by the District Magistrate under Section 3(1) of the Kerala Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 2007, classifying her son as a 'known rowdy', subsequently confirmed by the State Government and extended for one year. The petitioner raised several grounds including non-application of mind, prejudice caused by the same official signing both confirmation orders, imposition of maximum detention period without reasons, non-consideration of the detenue's representation, and failure to supply translated copies of English documents. The court examined the original files and the statement of the Deputy Commissioner of Police and found that the two latest criminal cases (Crime Nos. 219 and 222 of 2026), though registered on the same day, involved separate incidents, different victims, and distinct offences, and therefore could be treated as separate prejudicial activities. The court rejected the contentions regarding the externment-to-detention transition, the same signatory on Ext.P2 and P3 orders (holding it to be an institutional decision of the Government), and the imposition of the maximum detention period, finding no merit in the petitioner's arguments on these grounds.