Delhi High Court: Sleeping on Pavement Cannot Be Treated as Negligence, Enhances Compensation to Victims’ Families
In a significant judgment strengthening the rights of vulnerable pedestrians, the Delhi High Court has ruled that people sleeping on pavements cannot be held guilty of contributory negligence if they are run over by a motor vehicle. Setting aside an earlier finding of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT), the Court observed that the entire responsibility in such cases lies with the driver who illegally drives onto a footpath, a space reserved exclusively for pedestrians.
Justice Anish Dayal delivered the ruling while hearing appeals arising from a 2015 accident beneath the Madipur Metro station in West Delhi, where a speeding truck mounted the pavement and ran over four people sleeping there. Two victims lost their lives while two others sustained serious injuries. The MACT had earlier reduced the compensation by 50%, holding that the victims were partly negligent because they had chosen to sleep on the pavement.
The High Court rejected that reasoning, holding that a pavement is meant for pedestrians and that the law does not permit motor vehicles to enter or drive over it. The Court observed that whether a person is walking, standing, resting, or sleeping on a footpath, such conduct cannot be treated as contributory negligence when a vehicle unlawfully intrudes into that protected space. The driver alone bears legal responsibility for the accident.
Recognising the social realities faced by many homeless persons and daily-wage labourers, the Court noted that countless people sleep on pavements not out of choice but because they have no safer alternative. It observed that although sleeping on a pavement may involve certain risks, it cannot be inferred that such persons should anticipate that a truck or other vehicle would drive onto a footpath in violation of traffic laws.
The Bench further emphasised that the primary purpose of a pavement is to provide a safe area for pedestrians, separate from vehicular traffic. Drivers are under a heightened duty of care near pedestrian spaces and cannot escape liability by arguing that the victims were using the pavement for purposes other than walking. The Court made it clear that the unlawful act of driving onto a footpath cannot be shifted onto those occupying that space.
Consequently, the High Court set aside the tribunal’s finding of 50% contributory negligence, enhanced the compensation payable to the families of the deceased and the injured victims, and directed the insurance company to deposit the revised compensation along with accrued interest before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal within six weeks.
The ruling is expected to have wider implications for motor accident compensation claims involving pedestrians. It reinforces the principle that courts must assess negligence based on the unlawful conduct of the driver rather than the economic circumstances of vulnerable victims. By recognising the realities of homelessness and reaffirming the sanctity of pedestrian spaces, the Delhi High Court has underscored that road safety obligations rest squarely on motorists who violate traffic laws.
