Right To Walk Is A Fundamental Right Under Articles 19(1)(d) & 21; Priority Over Motorised Vehicles: Supreme Court

"The primary right of movement under Article 19(1)(d) is the Fundamental Right to Walk, a right that precedes the right to move on wheels and this precious right must extend to guaranteeing access to safe and well demarcated footpath, " Supreme Court, in a landmark judgment dated June 19, 2026, has declared that the 'Right to Walk' is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

A bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar observed that this right is inextricably connected to the right to life under Article 21 and the right to move freely under Article 19(1)(d). The Court emphasized that the rights of pedestrians on demarcated footpaths must take priority over the movement of motorised vehicles.

The matter arose from a tragic accident where a five-year-old boy, while walking to school with his father, was crushed to death by a tanker coming from behind. The accident occurred on a stretch of road that lacked both a footpath and a pedestrian crossing. While the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (MACT) awarded a compensation of Rs. 7,82,000/-, the High Court subsequently reduced this amount to Rs. 4,70,000/-, prompting the father to approach the Apex Court.

The primary legal issue before the Court was whether the right to walk on safe, demarcated footpaths constitutes a fundamental right under the Constitution. The Court also examined the correlative duties of municipal authorities to provide such infrastructure and the appropriate standards for calculating compensation in the death of a minor.

Right To Walk Inextricably Linked To Article 21

The Court observed that while road safety guidelines are being monitored, there is a more fundamental issue regarding the simple human activity of walking. The bench noted that the right to walk is deeply connected to the right to life and is a core component of the freedom of movement.

It is necessary to disabuse the mind of associating the "right to move" only with movement on wheels, as humans walked long before wheels were invented. The Court held that the primary right of movement under Article 19(1)(d) is the Fundamental Right to Walk, which demands access to safe and well-demarcated footpaths.

Walking Precedes Movement On Wheels

The Court highlighted that the right to walk precedes the right to move on wheels and must be guaranteed by municipal authorities. The bench remarked that the citizen’s fundamental right to walk on a demarcated footpath is primary and shall have priority over movement by motorised vehicles.

It was noted with regret that municipal administrations have historically focused on creating roads suitable for motorised vehicles while eclipsing the needs of walkers. This "elitism" has led to a situation where walkers are often treated as a nuisance by drivers of motorised transport.

"The fundamental right to walk on demarcated footpaths shall override the privilege of a motorised vehicle."

Failure To Recognize Pedestrian Rights A Civilizational Problem

The bench observed that walking has deep cultural, social, religious, and political roots in the Indian imagination, citing examples like the Dandi March and the Pandharpur Wari. Despite this, the phrase "pedestrian" has acquired pejorative shades in modern society.

The Court noted that the absence of safe footpaths and their subjugation to motor transport is a civilizational problem that must be addressed. It held that providing comfortable space for an easy and carefree walk is the "minimum of the minimum duty" that a municipal authority owes to its citizens.

Motor Vehicles Act Not A Legislation For Pedestrian Rights

The Court clarified that the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is not a statute intended to protect the right to walk. Rather, it was enacted primarily to standardise commercial transport and create revenue-generating systems. In the discourse of the 1988 Act, the right of a pedestrian is merely incidental, while the "vehicle" remains the subject of the legislation.

Even the Motor Vehicles (Driving) Regulations, 2017, serve only as guiding principles for drivers and do not elevate the right to walk to a fundamental status. The Court emphasized that the fundamental right to walk on demarcated footpaths is independent of the nooks and crannies of the Motor Vehicles Act.

Need For A Statutory Framework And Regulatory Body

The Court observed that while rights like education and food security have statutory frameworks (RTE Act and NFSA), there is no legislation protecting the right to walk. It found it compelling to lay down a statutory framework to recognise duty bearers and provide quick remedies for violations.

The bench directed the Registry to send the judgment to various Union Ministries and the Law Commission to initiate the necessary legal framework. This framework should include a full-time regulator to plan, enforce, and implement the right to walk, ensuring institutional memory and expertise.

Restitutionary Remedies Against Municipal Authorities

The Court held that if the fundamental right to walk on a demarcated footpath is violated, a citizen is entitled to a restitutionary remedy. This remedy is distinct from claims under the Motor Vehicles Act and can be enforced under the Constitution or Sections 38-40 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.

Such public duties can be enforced against Urban Development Authorities, Municipal Corporations, Municipalities, or Panchayats. The Court stressed that these bodies must maintain institutional integrity and transparency in effectuating this fundamental right.

Enhancement Of Compensation For Death Of Minor

Turning to the facts of the case, the Court found that the High Court erred in reducing the compensation. Relying on the precedent in Karuna Parmar v. Prakash Sinha (2025), the Court recalculated the compensation based on the Minimum Wages Act for skilled workers.

The Court assessed the annual income at Rs. 1,12,392/- after adding 40% for future prospects and deducting 50% for personal expenses. Applying a multiplier of 18, the Court enhanced the total compensation to Rs. 11,44,628/-, covering loss of dependency, consortium, estate, and funeral expenses.

The Supreme Court concluded by declaring the Right to Walk as an integral part of Articles 19(1) and 21 of the Constitution. It directed the Government to initiate a statutory framework for pedestrian infrastructure. The Court also ordered the enhancement of compensation to the appellants, to be paid within two months. The Registry was directed to re-number the case as a petition under Article 32 titled Re: Fundamental Right to Walk and Footpath.

Date of Decision: June 19, 2026