The Supreme Court of India has expansively interpreted the fundamental right to walk under the Constitution. The Court held that the right to move freely under Article 19(1)(d) includes the primary right to walk on safe, demarcated footpaths, which takes precedence over motorized traffic. The ruling came in a motor accident claim arising from the tragic death of a five-year-old boy.
Background of the Case
The appellants’ five-year-old son was walking with his father to a neighbourhood school when a tanker lorry struck the child from behind, crushing him. There was neither a footpath nor a pedestrian crossing at the location. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded compensation of Rs. 7,82,000/-. On appeal, the High Court reduced it to Rs. 4,70,000/-. The Supreme Court enhanced the compensation and used the occasion to articulate a transformative constitutional vision on pedestrian rights.
Supreme Court’s Observations & Ruling
A Bench comprising Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar delivered a powerful judgment emphasizing that:
- The right to walk is integral to the right to life under Article 21 and the right to move freely under Article 19(1)(d). It also connects to freedoms of expression, assembly, and association.
- This right predates motorized transport and must be recognized as primary. Citizens have a fundamental right to safe, demarcated footpaths.
- Motorized vehicles cannot enjoy monopoly over public roads. Footpaths must have priority.
- Municipal corporations, urban development authorities, municipalities, and panchayats have a correlative duty to construct, maintain, and safeguard footpaths wherever roads exist.
- Violation of this right entitles citizens to constitutional remedies, independent of claims under the Motor Vehicles Act.
The Court directed the Union Ministries of Housing and Urban Affairs, Rural Development, and Road Transport & Highways, as well as the Law Commission, to consider enacting a comprehensive legislation to protect and enforce this right, including establishing a regulatory body.
On the compensation aspect, the Court enhanced the award to Rs. 11,44,628/- (following principles from Karuna Parmar v. Prakash Sinha), to be paid within two months.
The case was re-numbered as a petition under Article 32 titled Re: Fundamental Right to Walk and Footpath, with the Union Government impleaded.
Key Takeaways
- Right to Walk is now firmly recognized as a fundamental right with priority over vehicular traffic.
- Municipal authorities have an enforceable duty to provide and maintain safe footpaths.
- This judgment marks a shift from vehicle-centric urban planning to pedestrian-inclusive infrastructure.
- Incidents of pedestrians being treated as nuisances on roads must end.
- The ruling calls for legislative and institutional reforms to make the right effective.
Case Details
Case Name: Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz & Anr. v. P. Ayyappan & Ors.
Citation: 2026 INSC 647
Case Number: Civil Appeal Nos. 4665-4666 of 2025
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Atul S. Chandurkar
Court: Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment: 19 June 2026
Click HERE for full Judgment.
Lawcutor 