Supreme Court slams UP Government for illegal demolition of house, orders ₹25 lakh compensation
- Legal Newss
- Nov 6, 2024
- 3 min read
Updated: Nov 10, 2024
𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖴𝖯 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗒 ₹25 𝗅𝖺𝗄𝗁 𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗎𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖿𝗎𝗋𝗍𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗍𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗌 𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗅𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇.
𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗆𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗈𝗇 𝖶𝖾𝖽𝗇𝖾𝗌𝖽𝖺𝗒 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖼𝗂𝗓𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖴𝗍𝗍𝖺𝗋 𝖯𝗋𝖺𝖽𝖾𝗌𝗁 (𝖴𝖯) 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝖿𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗁𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖺𝗇 𝗂𝗇𝖽𝗂𝗏𝗂𝖽𝗎𝖺𝗅'𝗌 𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗌𝖾 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗅𝗈𝗐𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖾𝗌. 𝖠 𝖡𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗁 𝗈𝖿 𝖢𝗁𝗂𝖾𝖿 𝖩𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾 𝗈𝖿 𝖨𝗇𝖽𝗂𝖺 (𝖢𝖩𝖨) 𝖣𝖸 𝖢𝗁𝖺𝗇𝖽𝗋𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗎𝖽 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖩𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾𝗌 𝖩𝖡 𝖯𝖺𝗋𝖽𝗂𝗐𝖺𝗅𝖺 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖬𝖺𝗇𝗈𝗃 𝖬𝗂𝗌𝗋𝖺 𝗈𝖻𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗐𝖺𝗌 '𝗁𝗂𝗀𝗁 𝗁𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝖽' 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗒 𝗈𝖿 𝗅𝖺𝗐. "𝖧𝗈𝗐 𝖼𝖺𝗇 𝗒𝗈𝗎 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝗈𝗆𝖾𝗈𝗇𝖾'𝗌 𝗁𝗈𝗆𝖾 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗁 𝗂𝗍 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗅𝗈𝗐𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝖿 𝗅𝖺𝗐 𝗈𝗋 𝗌𝖾𝗋𝗏𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾," 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖡𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗁 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝖽. 𝖧𝖾𝗇𝖼𝖾, 𝗂𝗍 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖴𝖯 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗍𝗈 𝗉𝖺𝗒 ₹25 𝗅𝖺𝗄𝗁 𝖺𝗌 𝗉𝗎𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖿𝗎𝗋𝗍𝗁𝖾𝗋 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗍𝗈 𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝗋𝗂𝗆𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗌 𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗌𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗉𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗂𝖻𝗅𝖾.
𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝖻𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖼𝖾𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗂𝗇 𝖺 𝗆𝗈𝗇𝗍𝗁, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗆𝖺𝖽𝖾 𝗂𝗍 𝖼𝗅𝖾𝖺𝗋. "𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝖺𝗇𝗒 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾 𝗈𝗋 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗅𝗈𝗌𝗎𝗋𝖾 𝗍𝗈 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗈𝖼𝖼𝗎𝗉𝗂𝖾𝗋𝗌 𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖻𝖺𝗌𝗂𝗌 𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝖺𝗋𝖼𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗈𝖿 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗍𝗈 𝖻𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝗂𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝗎𝗍. 𝖨𝗍 𝗂𝗌 𝖼𝗅𝖾𝖺𝗋 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝗁𝗂𝗀𝗁 𝗁𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝖽 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖺𝗎𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗒 𝗈𝖿 𝗅𝖺𝗐.
𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗋 𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝗇𝗅𝗒 𝖻𝖾𝖼𝖺𝗎𝗌𝖾 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗋 𝗁𝖺𝖽 𝖿𝗅𝖺𝗀𝗀𝖾𝖽 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗂𝗇 𝗇𝖾𝗐𝗌𝗉𝖺𝗉𝖾𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍. 𝖲𝗎𝖼𝗁 𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖻𝗒 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗇𝗇𝗈𝗍 𝖻𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗎𝗇𝗍𝖾𝗇𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖾𝖽 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝗐𝗁𝖾𝗇 𝖽𝖾𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗏𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗉𝖾𝗋𝗍𝗒, 𝗅𝖺𝗐 𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝖻𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗅𝗈𝗐𝖾𝖽," 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗌𝖺𝗂𝖽. 𝖠𝗌 𝗉𝖾𝗋 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗋, 𝗁𝗂𝗌 𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗌𝖾 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗁𝖾𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝖺𝗇𝗒 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗈𝗋 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾 𝗈𝗋 𝖾𝗑𝗉𝗅𝖺𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖿𝗈𝗋 𝖺𝗅𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖾𝖽𝗅𝗒 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝖺 𝗁𝗂𝗀𝗁𝗐𝖺𝗒.
𝖭𝗈𝗍𝖺𝖻𝗅𝗒, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗋 𝖼𝗅𝖺𝗂𝗆𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗅𝗂𝖺𝗍𝗈𝗋𝗒 𝗆𝖾𝖺𝗌𝗎𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝖿𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗁𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗆𝖾𝖽𝗂𝖺 𝖺𝖻𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝖺𝗅𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖾𝖽 𝗂𝗋𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗋𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝗇 𝖺 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝗌𝗍𝗋𝗎𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍. 𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗌𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖴𝖯 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍'𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍 𝖿𝗈𝗋 𝖺𝗇 𝖺𝖽𝗃𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗇𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍, 𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝗍𝖾𝗋 𝗇𝖾𝖾𝖽𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝖻𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗍𝗅𝗒 𝖺𝖽𝖽𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗌𝖾𝖽 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗅 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅 𝖽𝗈𝖼𝗎𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗌 𝗁𝖺𝖽 𝖺𝗅𝗋𝖾𝖺𝖽𝗒 𝖻𝖾𝖾𝗇 𝗌𝗎𝖻𝗆𝗂𝗍𝗍𝖾𝖽. "𝖶𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝖾 𝗇𝗈𝗍 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗂𝗇𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝖼𝖼𝖾𝗉𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝖾𝗌𝗍 𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗈𝖿 𝖴𝖯 𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝖽𝗃𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗇 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝖾𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗌 𝗌𝗂𝗇𝖼𝖾 𝗉𝗅𝖾𝖺𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗌 𝖺𝗋𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗍𝖾𝖽 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗂𝗌 𝗋𝖾𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗈 𝖾𝗏𝖺𝗅𝗎𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗋𝗂𝖺𝗅𝗌 𝗉𝗅𝖺𝖼𝖾𝖽 𝖻𝖾𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖾 𝗍𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝖽𝖾 𝗅𝖾𝗀𝖺𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗒 𝗈𝖿 𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇," 𝗂𝗍 𝗌𝖺𝗂𝖽. 𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾, 𝖺𝖼𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗍𝗈 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍, 𝖼𝗈𝗎𝗅𝖽 𝗇𝗈𝗍 𝗌𝗁𝗈𝗐 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗈𝗋𝗂𝗀𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝗍𝗁 𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗁𝗂𝗀𝗁𝗐𝖺𝗒, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗈𝖿 𝖺𝗇𝗒 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗈𝗋 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝖺𝗇𝗒 𝗅𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖺𝖼𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗌𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗁𝖺𝖽 𝖻𝖾𝖾𝗇 𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗄𝖾𝗇 𝖻𝖾𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖾 𝗂𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇.
𝖥𝗎𝗋𝗍𝗁𝖾𝗋, 𝖺𝗇 𝗂𝗇𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗋𝗒 𝗋𝖾𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍 𝖻𝗒 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖭𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖺𝗅 𝖧𝗎𝗆𝖺𝗇 𝖱𝗂𝗀𝗁𝗍𝗌 𝖢𝗈𝗆𝗆𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇 (𝖭𝖧𝖱𝖢) 𝗋𝖾𝗏𝖾𝖺𝗅𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝖿𝖺𝗋 𝗆𝗈𝗋𝖾 𝖾𝗑𝗍𝖾𝗇𝗌𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗇 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗌𝗎𝗉𝗉𝗈𝗌𝖾𝖽 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍. 𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗅𝗂𝗇𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝗐𝗁𝗂𝗅𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗆𝗎𝗌𝗍 𝖺𝗌𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗂𝗇 𝖾𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝗍𝗁 𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽, 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗎𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆𝖺𝗅 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾𝗌 𝗂𝖿 𝖺𝗇𝗒 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗌 𝖺𝗋𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗎𝗇𝖽, 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝗀𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗌 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗈𝗉𝗉𝗈𝗋𝗍𝗎𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗒 𝗍𝗈 𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝗌.
𝖠𝗇𝗒 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍 𝖺𝗇 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗆𝗎𝗌𝗍 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝖾 𝗂𝗇 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗋𝗆 𝗈𝖿 𝖺 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗌𝗈𝗇𝖾𝖽 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁 𝗌𝗎𝖿𝖿𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝖺𝗅𝗅𝗈𝗐𝖾𝖽 𝖿𝗈𝗋 𝗋𝖾𝗌𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝗏𝖺𝖼𝖺𝗍𝖾, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖡𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗁 𝗎𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋𝗌𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖾𝖽. 𝖠𝖼𝖼𝗈𝗋𝖽𝗂𝗇𝗀𝗅𝗒, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝗋𝗎𝗅𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖺𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖾 𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖻𝗒 𝖴𝖯 𝗀𝗈𝗏𝖾𝗋𝗇𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗐𝖺𝗌 𝗈𝖿 𝗁𝗂𝗀𝗁 𝗁𝖺𝗇𝖽𝖾𝖽𝗇𝖾𝗌𝗌 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖿𝗈𝗋𝖾, 𝗂𝗍 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝗉𝗎𝗇𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗏𝖾 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝖾𝗇𝗌𝖺𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖺𝗇𝖽 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗁𝗂𝖾𝖿 𝖲𝖾𝖼𝗋𝖾𝗍𝖺𝗋𝗒 𝗍𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗇𝖽𝗎𝖼𝗍 𝖺𝗇 𝗂𝗇𝗊𝗎𝗂𝗋𝗒 𝗂𝗇𝗍𝗈 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝗍𝗂𝗋𝖾 𝗆𝖺𝗍𝗍𝖾𝗋. "𝖳𝗁𝗂𝗌 𝗐𝗂𝗅𝗅 𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗅𝗎𝖽𝖾 𝖽𝗂𝗌𝖼𝗂𝗉𝗅𝗂𝗇𝖺𝗋𝗒 𝖺𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝖺𝗀𝖺𝗂𝗇𝗌𝗍 𝖺𝗇𝗒 𝗈𝖿𝖿𝗂𝖼𝖾𝗋 𝗐𝗁𝗈 𝖽𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗅𝗂𝗌𝗁𝖾𝖽 𝗇𝗈𝗍 𝗈𝗇𝗅𝗒 𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗌𝖾 𝗈𝖿 𝗉𝖾𝗍𝗂𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇𝖾𝗋 𝖻𝗎𝗍 𝖺𝗇𝗒𝖻𝗈𝖽𝗒 𝖾𝗅𝗌𝖾 𝗐𝗁𝗈 𝗆𝖾𝗍 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗌𝖺𝗆𝖾 𝖿𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝗂𝗇 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖺𝗋𝖾𝖺," 𝗂𝗍 𝖺𝖽𝖽𝖾𝖽.
𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝖲𝗎𝗉𝗋𝖾𝗆𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝖺𝗅𝗌𝗈 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝖺𝗅𝗅 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝖽𝗁𝖾𝗋𝖾 𝗍𝗈 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗅𝗈𝗐𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗐𝗁𝗂𝗅𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗈𝗎𝗍 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗈𝖿 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽𝗌: 𝖶𝗁𝗂𝗅𝖾 𝖼𝖺𝗋𝗋𝗒𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀, 𝖲𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗆𝗎𝗌𝗍 𝖺𝗌𝖼𝖾𝗋𝗍𝖺𝗂𝗇: - 𝖤𝗑𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝗍𝗁 𝗈𝖿 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽; - 𝖨𝖿 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗂𝗌 𝖿𝗈𝗎𝗇𝖽, 𝗇𝗈𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾 𝗁𝖺𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝖻𝖾 𝗂𝗌𝗌𝗎𝖾𝖽 𝗍𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗏𝖾 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍; - 𝖨𝖿 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗂𝗌 𝗋𝖺𝗂𝗌𝖾𝖽, 𝗍𝗁𝖾𝗇 𝖺 𝖽𝖾𝖼𝗂𝗌𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗈𝗇 𝗈𝖻𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝗂𝗈𝗇 𝗌𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗅𝖽 𝖻𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗇𝖽𝖾𝗋𝖾𝖽 𝖻𝗒 𝗐𝖺𝗒 𝗈𝖿 𝖺 𝗌𝗉𝖾𝖺𝗄𝗂𝗇𝗀 𝗈𝗋𝖽𝖾𝗋 𝗂𝗇 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗂𝖺𝗇𝖼𝖾 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁 𝗇𝖺𝗍𝗎𝗋𝖺𝗅 𝗃𝗎𝗌𝗍𝗂𝖼𝖾 𝗉𝗋𝗂𝗇𝖼𝗂𝗉𝗅𝖾𝗌;
𝖨𝖿 𝗋𝖾𝗃𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾𝖽, 𝗍𝗁𝖾𝗇 𝗋𝖾𝖺𝗌𝗈𝗇𝖺𝖻𝗅𝖾 𝗍𝗂𝗆𝖾 𝗌𝗁𝗈𝗎𝗅𝖽 𝖻𝖾 𝗀𝗂𝗏𝖾𝗇 𝗍𝗈 (𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝖾𝗋) 𝗍𝗈 𝗋𝖾𝗆𝗈𝗏𝖾 𝖾𝗇𝖼𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖼𝗁𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍. 𝖳𝗁𝖾 𝗋𝖾𝗀𝗂𝗌𝗍𝗋𝖺𝗋 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗂𝖼𝗂𝖺𝗅 𝗌𝗁𝖺𝗅𝗅 𝖼𝗂𝗋𝖼𝗎𝗅𝖺𝗍𝖾 𝖺 𝖼𝗈𝗉𝗒 𝗈𝖿 𝗍𝗁𝗂𝗌 𝗃𝗎𝖽𝗀𝗆𝖾𝗇𝗍 𝗍𝗈 𝖺𝗅𝗅 𝗌𝗍𝖺𝗍𝖾𝗌 𝗍𝗈 𝖼𝗈𝗆𝗉𝗅𝗒 𝗐𝗂𝗍𝗁 𝗉𝗋𝗈𝖼𝖾𝖽𝗎𝗋𝖾 𝗍𝗈 𝖻𝖾 𝖿𝗈𝗅𝗅𝗈𝗐𝖾𝖽 𝖿𝗈𝗋 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝗉𝗎𝗋𝗉𝗈𝗌𝖾𝗌 𝗈𝖿 𝗋𝗈𝖺𝖽 𝗐𝗂𝖽𝖾𝗇𝗂𝗇𝗀, 𝗍𝗁𝖾 𝖢𝗈𝗎𝗋𝗍 𝖽𝗂𝗋𝖾𝖼𝗍𝖾𝖽.
Comments