If you actually want to do a 2D calculation, you need to check the third column of the second table. It needs to say "yes" or "any" there, "no" and "3d" won't help you.
As a graduate of KIT, of course I'm most used to Turbomole for my (non-periodic) calculations and it rightfully has the "turbo" in the name since it has very good symmetry algorithms.
If you do not have the money to buy a license, check out the first table in the link for free packages among the options you have generated from the second table.
@Jurgen wieppert thank you so much for the suggestion. I have already gone through the list I was not sure which is the most suitable or widely accepted software among these. So, calculation from any of the above has a GUI based software that's what I need the most.
Well, there have already been plenty of calculations on graphene, so you could just check out what other people used for their calculations. Generally nobody would doubt the validity of a Turbomole or Gaussian calculations, but using another (eventually free) package doesn't mean anyone would disregard it as long as it's properly documented. Usually doubts are more often related with regards to the functional and basis set choice. Additionally, if you use e.g. TDDFT for the optical properties, questions may come around the parameters for that.
Therefore, the most important thing you need to look up what methods the packages provide for your specific desired approach.