Supreme Court Declares Right to Walk on Demarcated Footpaths a Fundamental Right under Article 19(1)(d)

Overview The Supreme Court has pronounced that the right to walk on a properly marked footpath is a Fundamental Right . The Court linked this right to Article 19(1)(d) and read it together with Articles 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and Article 21 . The judgment emphasises that pedestrian infrastructure must be provided and maintained by urban authorities, and that remedies for violation are independent of the Motor Vehicles Act . Key Developments The Court held that walking on a demarcated footpath is a constitutional guarantee and takes precedence over motor‑vehicle movement. Urban development authorities, municipal corporations, municipalities and panchayats have a correlative duty to demarcate, construct, maintain and protect footpaths. Violation of the right entitles citizens to constitutional remedies for restitution and compensation, separate from the remedies under the Motor Vehicles Act. The judgment arose from a motor‑accident claim where a child was hit by a tanker; the Supreme Court increased compensation to Rs. 11,44,628 . Important Facts Bench: Justice PS Narasimha and Justice Atul S Chandurkar . Case citation: MANIYAR ILIYAZ SHAIK RIYAZ vs P. Ayyappan, C.A. No. 4665‑4666/2025, 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 632 . Previous related rulings: S Rajaseekaran v Union of India and ongoing monitoring by Justice JB Pardiwala. The Court described walking as “invisible to the light” and warned that the Motor Vehicles Act has historically impeded recognition of pedestrian rights. UPSC Relevance This judgment expands the interpretation of Fundamental Rights to include safe pedestrian infrastructure, linking constitutional law with urban planning and transport policy. Aspirants should note the interplay between Articles 19 and 21, the role of the Supreme Court , and statutory frameworks like the Motor Vehicles Act . The decision also underscores the duty of local bodies, a key point for questions on governance and decentralisation. Way Forward State and local governments must audit existing footpaths, demarcate missing ones, and ensure regular maintenance. Legal practitioners and activists should use the new constitutional remedy to challenge non‑compliance. Policy makers need to align urban transport plans with the constitutional mandate, integrating pedestrian‑friendly designs. Further judicial monitoring, as done by Justice JB Pardiwala, may be required to ensure implementation.