Supreme Court Recognizes Right to Safe Footpaths as Fundamental Right Under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21
Contents4
The Hindu - Opinion · 21 Jul 2026 · 2 min read
Prelims · Polity Mains · GS2 Governance High relevance
The Supreme Court ruled that walking on demarcated footpaths is a fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, directing States and UTs to frame policies for pedestrian safety, addressing urban governance and public health crises.
Key points
Supreme Court ruling in Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz vs P. Ayyappan (2026) recognized safe footpaths as a fundamental right under Article 19(1)(d) (freedom of movement) and Article 21 (right to life), mandating state action.
Urban governance failure: The judgment highlights systemic neglect of pedestrian infrastructure, where footpaths are routinely encroached by vehicles, vendors, and utilities, forcing citizens onto dangerous roads.
Public health imperative: With 49.4% of Indian adults and 57.2% of women not meeting WHO's physical activity guidelines, walkable cities could combat rising diabetes, hypertension, and obesity epidemics.
Road safety crisis: Pedestrians and two-wheeler riders account for 67% of India's 1.28 lakh annual road fatalities (MoRTH 2024), exacerbated by poor footpath design and enforcement.
GS2-Governance: This connects to urban local body responsibilities under the 74th Constitutional Amendment and the Street Vendors Act, 2014, requiring balanced solutions for pedestrians and livelihoods.
GS3-Environment: Walkable cities reduce vehicular emissions, aligning with India's Net Zero targets and Sustainable Development Goal 11 (sustainable cities).
Judicial activism: The verdict follows the SC's tradition of expanding Article 21's scope (Olga Tellis, 1985) to include rights like shelter and now pedestrian safety.
International precedent: The WHO's Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018-2030 emphasizes walkability as a public health priority, which India must integrate into urban planning.
Way Forward: States must implement the SC mandate by adopting universal footpath design standards, dedicated vending zones, automated parking penalties, and pedestrian audits in city master plans under the Smart Cities Mission.
Key terms
- Article 19(1)(d)
- Guarantees citizens the right to move freely throughout India's territory. The SC's interpretation now includes safe pedestrian infrastructure as essential for exercising this freedom, impacting urban policy and municipal governance.
- Article 21
- Protects life and personal liberty, judicially expanded to include dignity, clean environment, and now walkability. This ruling reinforces the state's positive obligation to create enabling conditions for fundamental rights.
- Street Vendors Act, 2014
- Legislation protecting vendors' rights while mandating town vending committees for spatial planning. The SC judgment necessitates harmonizing vendor zones with pedestrian pathways under this Act.
- 74th Constitutional Amendment
- Empowers urban local bodies with functions like urban planning and public infrastructure. The verdict underscores municipalities' duty to implement pedestrian-friendly designs under Articles 243W and 243X.
Practice question
The Supreme Court's recognition of safe footpaths as a fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21 marks a significant shift in urban governance. Discuss the implications of this judgment for pedestrian safety, urban planning, and public health in India. (250 words, 15 marks)
GS2 15 marks 250 words Mains
Key terms to include: Article 19(1)(d) Article 21 74th Constitutional Amendment Street Vendors Act, 2014 Olga Tellis case Smart Cities Mission WHO Global Action Plan Sustainable Development Goal 11
Answer framework
Introduction
Briefly introduce the Supreme Court's ruling in Maniyar Iliyaz @ Shaik Riyaz vs P. Ayyappan (2026), recognizing safe footpaths as a fundamental right under Articles 19(1)(d) and 21, and its broader significance for urban governance.
Legal and Constitutional Implications
Expansion of Article 21 to include pedestrian safety, following judicial precedents like Olga Tellis (1985).
State's obligation to ensure safe footpaths under Article 19(1)(d) (freedom of movement) and Article 21 (right to life).
Role of urban local bodies under the 74th Constitutional Amendment in implementing pedestrian-friendly infrastructure.
Urban Governance and Planning
Systemic neglect of pedestrian infrastructure and encroachment issues.
Need for balanced solutions under the Street Vendors Act, 2014, to harmonize vendor zones with pedestrian pathways.
Integration of pedestrian audits and universal footpath design standards in city master plans under the Smart Cities Mission.
Public Health and Road Safety
Impact on public health: Addressing physical inactivity (49.4% of adults, 57.2% of women) and combating diabetes, hypertension, and obesity.
Road safety crisis: Pedestrians and two-wheeler riders account for 67% of India's annual road fatalities (1.28 lakh in 2024).
Alignment with WHO's Global Action Plan on Physical Activity 2018-2030 and Sustainable Development Goal 11 (sustainable cities).
Conclusion
Emphasize the need for a multi-stakeholder approach involving state governments, urban local bodies, and citizens to implement the SC's mandate effectively, ensuring pedestrian safety while addressing livelihood concerns.
Fact check
All facts verified