THE right to walk on a demarcated footpath is a fundamental right, the Supreme Court ruled. Ina significantverdict, the top court held that this right shall have priority over motorised vehicles on demarcated paths and it forms part of the right to movement guaranteed under Article 19 (1) (d) and other fundamentalrightsincludingArticle 21 (right to life and liberty). A bench of justices PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar held that a citizen’s fundamental right to walk on a demarcated footpath is primary and shall have priority over movement by motorised vehicles. The declaration by the top court came in an unfortunate motor accident compensation case where a father lost his five-year-old son while taking him to school.

 

“The right to walk is a fundamentalright underPartIII of the Constitution. It is integral to the right to movement guaranteed under Article 19(1)(d),read with Article 19(1)(a), Article 19(1) (b), Article 19(1) (c) and Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The fundamental right to walk will take within its sweep the right to demarcated footpaths. These rights areprimaryand shallhave priority over movement by motorised vehicles,” the bench ruled. It held that the fundamental right to walk on demarcated footpaths has acorrelative duty and“If theroad exists, there is a duty to ensure that there are demarcated and well-maintained footpaths for walkers”.

 

The bench said the duty bearers are the urban development authorities, municipal corporations, municipalities and even panchayats, who must endeavour to demarcate, construct, maintain, and safeguard footpathsandothernecessarypedestrian infrastructure, as walking is integral to life. The top court said human beings have started walkinglong beforewheelswere put on the path and the primary right of movement is the Fundamental Right to Walk, a right that precedes the right to move on wheels. 

 

 

NOTING that young and bright advocates are deserting the profession due to financialhardships,Supreme CourtonFriday said a“Young Lawyers’ Professional AssistanceFund”mustbecreated to stop the“brain drain”. A bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant and Justice V Mohana said , during formative period, many advocates remain dependent on modest stipends paid by seniors or by Bar associations, which are often insufficient to meet basic living expenses.