The Right To Walk Is A Fundamental Right, And Footpaths Are Part Of It
The Supreme Court has held that walking on a demarcated footpath is protected by Part III of the Constitution, put the duty to build and maintain them on municipal bodies, and turned the case into a suo motu petition against three Union Ministries.
The Court held that the right to walk is a fundamental right under Part III, integral to the right of movement under Article 19(1)(d) read with Articles 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and 21, and that it takes within its sweep the right to demarcated footpaths. These rights are primary and have priority over movement by motorised vehicles. The duty is correlative: where a road exists, urban development authorities, municipal corporations, municipalities and panchayats must demarcate, construct, maintain and safeguard footpaths. Violation entitles citizens to constitutional and legal remedies for restitution and compensation.
- Pedestrians come first. The right to walk has priority over movement by motorised vehicles, not the other way round.
- A road without a footpath is a breach. If the road exists, the duty to provide a demarcated, maintained footpath follows.
- The duty bearers are named — urban development authorities, municipal corporations, municipalities and panchayats.
- The case did not end. The Registry was directed to re-number it as an Article 32 petition titled Re: Fundamental Right to Walk and Footpath, with three Union Ministries impleaded.
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Bench
- Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, Justice PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA
- Citation
- 2026 INSC 647
- Reported
- [2026] 7 S.C.R. 175
- Case
- CIVIL APPEAL/4665/2025
- Decided
- 18 June 2026
- Outcome
- Appeals disposed of; case re-numbered as a suo motu Article 32 petition
What the Court held
The right to walk is a fundamental right under Part III of the Constitution. It is integral to the right to movement guaranteed by Article 19(1)(d), read with Articles 19(1)(a), 19(1)(b), 19(1)(c) and Article 21.
That right takes within its sweep the right to demarcated footpaths. And the Court put it in order of priority: these rights are primary, and they have priority over movement by motorised vehicles.
The duty that comes with it
A right of this kind is worth little without somebody obliged to give effect to it, so the Court spelled out the correlative duty. If the road exists, there is a duty to ensure there are demarcated and well-maintained footpaths for walkers.
The duty bearers are the urban development authorities, the municipal corporations, the municipalities and even the panchayats. They must endeavour to demarcate, construct, maintain and safeguard footpaths and other pedestrian infrastructure, because walking is integral to life.
Violation of the right entitles citizens to invoke constitutional and legal remedies against the duty bearers for restitution and compensation, and that remedy is independent of others.
Why this is not over
Having decided the appeals, the Court directed the Registry to re-number the case as a petition under Article 32, changing the cause title to Re: Fundamental Right to Walk and Footpath.
The Government of India was impleaded through the Ministries of Housing and Urban Affairs, Rural Development, and Road Transport and Highways, and an Additional Solicitor General was requested to assist. In other words, the Court has kept the file open and turned it into a national matter.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Is walking on a footpath a fundamental right in India?
Yes. The Supreme Court has held the right to walk is a fundamental right under Part III, integral to Article 19(1)(d) read with Articles 19(1)(a), (b), (c) and 21, and that it includes the right to demarcated footpaths.
Who is responsible for footpaths?
Urban development authorities, municipal corporations, municipalities and panchayats. Where a road exists, the duty to demarcate, build, maintain and safeguard a footpath follows.
Can I claim compensation if there is no footpath?
The Court said violation entitles citizens to invoke constitutional and legal remedies against the duty bearers for restitution and compensation, independent of other remedies.
Acting on a missing or encroached footpath
- Identify the duty bearer for that stretch — the municipal corporation, the municipality, the urban development authority or the panchayat.
- Put the failure in writing to that body first, with photographs and the location, so there is a record of notice.
- Frame the grievance as a breach of a fundamental right, not as a civic complaint. That is what this judgment now makes available.
- Note that restitution and compensation are expressly contemplated, and that the remedy is independent of any other.
Source. Supreme Court of India, 2026 INSC 647, [2026] 7 S.C.R. 175, CIVIL APPEAL/4665/2025, decided 18 June 2026 by Justice Atul S. Chandurkar, Justice PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks Supreme Court of India and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in