The Fundamental Right to Walk: What the Supreme Court Said, and What the Street Actually Looks Like
Every citizen has the fundamental right to travel freely anywhere in India,
whether by vehicle or on foot. But do pedestrians actually enjoy the same
freedom and convenience as motorists? The stark reality is that they do
not.
Proper sidewalks on both sides of the road and clearly marked zebra
crossings are basic necessities. Furthermore, India is home to approximately
26.8 million persons with disabilities. Do we see accessible infrastructure
for them in our neighborhoods? No, we don't. Our society remains largely
exclusive, prioritizing facilities for the privileged and influential, who
continue to maintain their bourgeois attitudes.
It is against this backdrop that the Supreme Court delivered a landmark
judgment in June 2026, addressing this critical issue.
On June 19, 2026, the Supreme Court of India declared that the right to
walk safely on a footpath is a fundamental right guaranteed by the
Constitution. This is a historic judgment, articulated with a clarity that
no court had shown before. However, the Court itself acknowledged that India
currently lacks the infrastructure and legal framework to practically
deliver this right. In reality, this right is most systematically denied to
the two groups who need it most the visually impaired and the physically
disabled.
The June 2026 judgment formally declared the right to walk as a
'fundamental right' falling under Part III of the Constitution. This grants
citizens the right to directly approach the court under Article 32.
Consequently, building footpaths has transformed from a mere government
policy into a binding constitutional obligation.
This article explains what the Court actually decided and how the legal
journey reached this turning point. Moving beyond assumptions, let us
examine the true state of India's footpaths, crossings, and accessible
transport systems today, based on government audits, court-ordered surveys,
and field investigations
1. The Judgment: Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz v. P. Ayyappan
This litigation originated as a standard dispute over motor accident
compensation. A father was escorting his five-year-old son to school one
morning when a tanker truck struck them from behind, inflicting fatal
injuries on the child. The accident site completely lacked both sidewalks
and pedestrian crossings. While the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal
originally granted the family ₹7.82 lakh in damages, the High Court
subsequently slashed this amount to ₹4.70 lakh. Deeming this reduction
entirely unjustified, the Supreme Court reinstated and increased the award
to ₹11.44 lakh, ordering the payment to be cleared within two months.
Choosing to look beyond the immediate issue of financial compensation, the
Bench utilized this case to deliver a major constitutional ruling. It
declared that the right to walk constitutes a fundamental right under Part
III of the Constitution, originating from the right to move freely (Article
19(1)(d)) when interpreted alongside freedom of speech, assembly, and
association (Articles 19(1)(a), (b), and (c)), as well as the right to life
and personal liberty (Article 21). As the Court articulated, walking is an
inseparable component of the broader right to movement. Consequently, this
fundamental privilege inherently encompasses the right to designated
sidewalks, and these pedestrian rights must take precedence over motorized
traffic.
The Bench also offered widely discussed social commentary, observing that
walking has historically served as a powerful instrument for protest and
societal reform. By invoking India's long legacy of protest marches and
pilgrimages without citing specific events, the Court emphasized that
walking is not merely physical locomotion, but also a practical expression
of assembly and free speech.
Furthermore, the Court sharply criticized the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988
for its heavy bias toward vehicles rather than pedestrians. It noted that
the existing framework treats pedestrian safety as an incidental element of
traffic management rather than a distinct, enforceable right.
2. Ground Reality: What India’s Footpaths Actually Look Like Today
The Indian Roads Congress standard for pedestrian facilities (IRC:103-2012)
is reasonably detailed. It specifies a clear, obstruction-free pedestrian
walking zone at least 1.8 meters wide (enough for two wheelchairs to pass
simultaneously). Additionally, it requires a "frontage zone" of 0.5 to 1
meter for buildings or shops, and a "furniture zone" for electricity poles,
dustbins, and street vendors. In total, the footpath width should be roughly
3.3 meters in residential areas and 5 to 6.5 meters or more on high-footfall
commercial streets. It also mandates tactile paving 600 mm away from
obstructions, kerb ramps with a slope no steeper than 1:12, and guardrails
1.1 meters high.
While this is the official standard, actual audit reports reveal a
completely different picture:
The Delhi Public Works Department (PWD) conducted an internal audit of its
roads and found that only 16% of the footpaths met the width standards set
by the IRC. Furthermore, only 25% of the footpaths had a surface condition
rated usable. This is not an estimate by social activists; it is from the
PWD's own official circular.
According to the OpenCity Urban Data Portal, pedestrians accounted for 32%
of all road accident deaths in the city in 2023. The Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways' 'Road Accidents in India 2024' report recorded
4,87,707 accidents and 1,77,175 deaths nationwide averaging nearly 20 deaths
every hour. Pedestrians made up 20.6% of these fatalities. Over-speeding was
responsible for roughly 70% of all fatal crashes. Notably, 70.8% of deaths
occurred on roads that lacked any footpaths whatsoever. In large metro
cities, where a much higher share of daily commutes is made on foot, the
share of pedestrian road deaths runs considerably higher than the national
average.
Encroachments (parked vehicles, construction debris, street vendors),
discontinuous footpaths that start and stop abruptly, broken surface
quality, a lack or complete absence of safe crossings, and government apathy
are the root causes behind these alarming statistics.
3. Where do the visually impaired and disabled stand in all this?
Accessibility is a Fundamental Right by Law
Alongside the general fight for pedestrian rights, related cases in the
Supreme Court are stuck in the exact same loop of "strong laws on paper,
zero reality on the ground." In a petition filed by Rajive Raturi, a
visually impaired human rights advocate seeking accessible public spaces (W.P.(C) No. 243 of 2005), the Court issued 11 action points to the Union
and state governments back in December 2017. Due to abysmal compliance, the
Court had to appoint the Centre for Disability Studies at NALSAR University
of Law in November 2023 to conduct a national independent audit.
Based on their report, titled "Finding Sizes for All," a bench led
by then-Chief Justice D.Y. Chandrachud delivered a landmark judgment on
November 8, 2024. The Supreme Court held that accessibility is itself a
fundamental and human right protected under Articles 14, 19, and 21 of the
Constitution. The Court also ruled that Rule 15 of the RPwD Rules (2017)
which was meant to enforce accessibility standards was invalid because it
used optional, recommendatory language ("may," "recommend") instead of
binding rules. The government was given a strict three-month deadline, until
February 28, 2025, to fix this.
Yet, this deadline came and went. Field reports from accessibility auditors
through late 2025 revealed that compliance remained alarmingly low. Even
official government procurement portals were not disabled-friendly, and
draft sector-specific guidelines (like transport and ICT) were still being
released piecemeal as drafts well into 2025 and 2026. This repeats the
frustrating 20-year cycle: powerful statements from the court, missed
deadlines, partial implementation, and endless rounds of new litigation.
The 'Accessible India' Campaign
The government's flagship accessibility initiative, the
Accessible India Campaign (Sugamya Bharat Abhiyan), was launched on
December 3, 2015, with an initial target completion date of 2016–17. That
target was extended multiple times until 2024, when its objectives were
quietly folded into a broader "Creation of Barrier-Free Environment Scheme"
without the original campaign ever being declared fully complete. A
third-party evaluation found that 80.5% of the buildings that actually
received funding were retrofitted. However, this figure only represents the
small subset of buildings that got funded, not the massive universe of
public infrastructure that desperately needs to be accessible.
How This Impacts Footpaths Specifically
The legal mandates are clear and demanding: continuous tactile paving for
the visually impaired, kerb ramps at every crossing, audible pedestrian
signals, and dropped kerbs are all mandatory under standard guidelines. On
actual Indian streets, however, reality looks completely different:
The failure to implement these standards on actual Indian streets creates
severe, everyday barriers to basic mobility. For instance, continuous
tactile paving the textured ground surface that allows visually impaired
individuals to navigate independently remains a rare exception rather than
the rule, usually reserved only for a few showcase stretches or major metro
corridors while being entirely absent from standard urban streets. Even in
the rare locations where this tactile paving is installed, it is routinely
blocked by parked vehicles, electricity poles, and advertising billboards;
while sighted pedestrians can easily spot these obstacles and step around
them, they pose a severe, sudden hazard to a visually impaired person
navigating with a cane.
Furthermore, the lack of sensory cues extends to major intersections, where
audible pedestrian signals that indicate when it is safe to cross remain
virtually non-existent outside a tiny handful of high-profile metropolitan
junctions. Finally, even the physical infrastructure designed for physical
accessibility is fundamentally flawed, as kerb ramps are frequently
constructed too steep for independent wheelchair use, built too narrow to
navigate safely, or left entirely blocked by infrastructure and
encroachments, rendering them completely useless for the very citizens who
rely on a predictable, level surface to move freely.
The core issue is that road planning and walkability studies rarely design for disability access from the start. The current practice is to build pavements for non-disabled adults first, treating accessibility as an optional afterthought. This must change. Today, persons with disabilities remain an overlooked and marginalized group whose fundamental rights to free movement are systematically violated.
4. And what happens when the footpath ends at a bus stop or station?
The situation becomes significantly worse the moment a commuter with a
disability attempts to transition from the street onto public transport.
Buses
Official government data reveals a stark gap in road transport
accessibility. Out of the 1,45,747 buses operated nationally across 61 State
Transport Undertakings (STUs), only 51,043 roughly 35% are equipped with
boarding and deboarding facilities designed for persons with
disabilities.
A Ground Check in Bengaluru
In late 2025, the investigative media outlet Citizen Matters audited
17 bus stops and three major bus terminals in Bengaluru, finding that most
of the infrastructure stood in direct violation of the Ministry of Road
Transport and Highways' accessibility guidelines. Even newly constructed
"smart" bus stops, which boasted modern amenities like vending machines and
phone-charging ports, completely lacked dedicated wheelchair spaces, tactile
paving, audio announcements, or connecting ramps to the footpath. Similarly,
despite otherwise good design elements, the major Shantinagar terminal
featured steps at every single platform, rendering it entirely unusable for
wheelchair users.
Metro Rail: Accessibility That Stops at the Front Door
Urban metro systems stand out as a partial exception to this trend. The
Delhi Metro is widely recognized for its accessible design, featuring
braille lift buttons, tactile flooring, and priority seating, with other
cities' metro networks replicating these standards to varying degrees.
However, accessibility experts continuously highlight a critical "last-mile"
barrier. While a commuter with a disability might be well-accommodated once
inside a metro station, the footpaths connecting that station to their home
or office are frequently broken, heavily encroached, or completely
non-existent.
A New Framework Awaits Enactment
In June 2025, the Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities
released a draft "Transport Accessibility Framework" for public
consultation. This framework proposes mandatory wheelchair spaces in new
buses and metro coaches, step-free station toilets, level-boarding ramps,
and specialized staff training across air, rail, and road transport
networks. However, this initiative remains a draft standard rather than a
notified, legally binding rule.
Viewed alongside the landmark Rajive Raturi litigation, the broader reality
remains consistent. On paper, India’s disability rights laws are
exceptionally robust, with the Supreme Court explicitly recognizing
accessibility as an integral part of the Right to Life under Article 21 of
the Constitution. The systemic failure lies not in the text of the law, but
almost entirely in execution, funding, and rigorous enforcement.
5. Why Enforcement Keeps Failing
The Supreme Court’s June 2026 judgment highlights the root cause of the
issue: India lacks dedicated legislation and a single accountable body for
pedestrian rights. Currently, the responsibility for sidewalks is fragmented
across public works departments, municipal corporations, the National
Highways Authority of India (NHAI), and local panchayats.
Although the Motor Vehicles Act of 1988 contains provisions to penalize
vehicular encroachment on footpaths, these laws are rarely enforced
efficiently on the ground.
Looking back, previous court orders from that period were remarkably
stringent. They mandated time-bound infrastructure audits, online grievance
portals, camera-based surveillance, and compulsory discussions on pedestrian
safety in monthly District Road Safety Committee meetings. Yet, subsequent
field studies show that missing footpaths and heavy encroachments remain the
norm. This pattern constantly repeats itself in Indian pedestrian and
disability rights litigation: the court issues an uncompromising directive,
but governments only implement it partially, slowly, and superficially just
to put on an act. A few years later, the court is forced to step in again
and issue an even harsher ruling on the exact same matter. This remains the
current state of affairs.
A mere judicial declaration cannot physically redesign a street.
Transforming our roads requires continuous municipal oversight, dedicated
funding, and political will the exact kind of practical support that a court
verdict cannot directly deliver.
6. The Gap Between the Law and the Street
The law and the courts have firmly established walking as a Part III fundamental right that takes priority over vehicular traffic, mandating that footpaths strictly comply with IRC:103 standards for width, surface quality, and tactile paving. Furthermore, with accessibility recognized as a core human right, public transport systems are legally required to feature wheelchair access, tactile paths, and audio announcements, while states were given a six-month window from October 2025 to notify dedicated pedestrian-safety rules under the Motor Vehicles Act.
However, ground audits reveal a stark contrast between legal mandates and everyday reality. Delhi’s own Public Works Department found that 84% of its footpaths fail basic IRC width standards, while Nagpur uncovered over 1,900 obstructions along just 10 kilometers of roadway, even on newly redesigned streets. Compliance with judicial deadlines remains alarmingly low a year after issuance, only about 35% of state-run buses offer basic disability boarding access, and the total absence of a comprehensive statutory framework for pedestrian rights ultimately forced the Supreme Court to direct the Law Commission to draft one from scratch.
The Supreme Court has now said the same thing twice in two different ways. It first spoke informally in 2025 when it began ordering footpath audits and grievance systems within the Rajaseekaran case. It spoke again, formally and at the highest constitutional level, in June 2026 when it declared walking a fundamental right and directed the Law Commission to build the legislation that has never existed.
Whether this second declaration succeeds where the first set of directions has struggled depends on factors a judgment alone cannot provide: sustained municipal funding, a single accountable authority instead of multiple overlapping departments, and a specific, monitored commitment to blind and disabled pedestrians. Based on the twenty-year record of parallel disability-rights litigation, these pedestrians remain the people for whom the distance between constitutional promise and the actual pavement is widest.
