- The Supreme Court ruled walking on demarcated footpaths is a fundamental constitutional right
- The right to walk is protected under Article 19(1)(d) and Article 21 of the Constitution
- Authorities must ensure footpaths are demarcated and maintained for pedestrian safety
The Supreme Court has ruled that the right to walk on demarcated footpaths is a fundamental right protected under the Constitution. The court held that this right takes priority over the movement of motor vehicles on roads.
In a judgment delivered on Friday, a bench comprising Justice PS Narasimha and Justice AS Chandurkar declared that the right to walk forms part of the freedoms guaranteed under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution, which protects the right to move freely throughout the territory of India. It is read together with Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), 19(1)(c) and Article 21, which safeguards the right to life and personal liberty.
"If a road exists, there must then be a duty to ensure that a footpath is demarcated and maintained for walkers. This is an enforceable duty," the bench said.
The ruling arose from a motor accident compensation case involving the death of a five-year-old boy. His father had taken him to school at 9 am when a tanker lorry struck the child from behind, crushing his waist and lower body. The boy died from his injuries. There was no footpath or pedestrian crossing at the location.
The Supreme Court increased the compensation payable to the child's father to Rs 11,44,628 and directed that it be paid within two months. It set aside a High Court order that had reduced the amount originally awarded.
"The violation of the right to walk on demarcated footpaths will entitle the citizens to invoke constitutional and legal remedies against duty bearers for restitution and compensation. This remedy is independent of the remedies that are available under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988," the bench said.
Citizens whose right to walk on demarcated footpaths is violated can seek constitutional and legal remedies against the responsible authorities for restitution and compensation.
The court made clear that this route is separate from claims available under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The bench observed that the absence of safe and comfortable footpaths and their frequent subordination to motor traffic represent a longstanding issue.
It noted that Indian cities and towns have often been planned with a strong emphasis on vehicles, leaving pedestrians in a vulnerable position.
The court traced how urban development came to favour motorised transport. It remarked that human beings walked long before wheels were introduced, and the primary right of movement under Article 19(1)(d) is the right to walk.
This right precedes the use of vehicles and must include access to safe, demarcated footpaths.
