Supreme Court Declares Right To Walk A Fundamental Right
Source: Indian Express
GS II: Indian Constitution- Features, Amendment, Significant Provisions and Basic Structure
Overview
- News in Brief
- Key Observations of the Supreme Court
- Implications for India
- Challenges
- Way Forward
Why in the News?
Recently in a landmark judgment, the Supreme Court held that right to walk safely on demarcated footpaths is a fundamental right.
News in Brief
- The Supreme Court in Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz versus P. Ayyappan case, observed that citizens have a right to safe and accessible pedestrian infrastructure, while making these remarks during a road accident case involving the death of a child.
- It emphasized that cities must prioritize pedestrians and not design roads only for motorized vehicles.
- The Court highlighted that walking is a basic mode of transport, but Indian urban planning remains automobile-centric, with poor or encroached footpaths.
Key Observations of the Supreme Court
State of walkability in India
- Walking remains a major mode of transport in India.
- Census data indicate that millions of Indians commute to work on foot.
- Despite this, footpaths are often
- Broken and poorly maintained.
- Encroached upon by vendors or parked vehicles.
- Discontinuous or absent
- Unsafe for children, elderly persons and persons with disabilities.
Problems with Automobile-centric Planning
- Urban infrastructure projects often focus on wider roads, flyovers, and faster vehicular movements.
- Such development frequently reduces pedestrian space.
- The Court observed that the entire transport ecosystem is dominated by road-based motor vehicles.
Legal Concerns
- The court noted that,
- Existing provisions under the Motor Vehicles Act prioritize vehicle regulation.
- There is no explicit recognition of
- The right to walk on demarcated footpaths
- Priority for pedestrian movement over motorized traffic.
Significance of walkable cities
- Studies across the world show that walkable cities
- Reduce pollution and congestion
- Improve public health
- Strengthen social interaction and community life
- Promote economic activity in local areas.
- Enhance road safety.
International Examples
- Copenhagen (Denmark)
- Integrated walking and cycling into daily urban mobility
- Reduced dependence on private vehicles.
- Bogota (Colombia)
- Developed people-centric transport systems.
- Improved accessibility and public mobility.
- Kigali (Rwanda)
- Encouraged pedestrian-friendly urban development
- Focused on sustainable transport planning.
Implications for India
- India is expected to witness rapid urbanization in coming decades.
- New urban centers are likely to emerge.
- The Supreme Court’s observations provide an opportunity to
- Design inclusive cities
- Promote sustainable mobility
- Avoid mistakes associated with excessive automobile dependence.
Challenges
- Infrastructure deficit
- Lack of continuous footpaths
- Poor maintenance of pedestrian facilities
- Encroachments
- Illegal parking and street encroachments obstruct movement
- Policy Bias
- Preferences for road expansion and vehicle mobility
- Funding Constraints
- Limited investment in pedestrian infrastructure.
Way Forward
- Adopt a Pedestrian-First Urban Planning Framework.
- Ensure universal accessibility in city design
- Protect footpaths from encroachments
- Integrate walking, cycling, and public transport.
- Make walkability a key criterion in Smart City and urban development projects.
Constitutional Provisions
- Article 19 (1)(d)
- Guarantees the freedom to move freely throughout the territory of India.
- Safe footpaths and pedestrian infrastructure facilitate this freedom.
- Article 21
- Guarantees the Right to Life and Personal Liberty.
- The Supreme Court has interpreted Article 21 broadly to include,
- Right to live with dignity
- Right to safety
- Right to a healthy environment
- Safe pedestrian mobility.
Key Takeaways

UPSC Prelims Practice Question
Consider the following statements
-
- The Supreme Court has recognized safe pedestrian movement on footpaths as part of the Fundamental rights framework.
- Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz versus P. Ayyappan case is related to Right to walk a fundamental right.
- Existing Motor Vehicles Act explicitly prioritize pedestrian movement over motorized traffic.
Which of the above statements are correct?
a) 1and 2 only
b) 2 and3 only
c) 1 and 3 only
d) 1,2 and 3
Answer: a) 1 and 2
Daily Current Affairs: Click Here