 |
|
The ongoing legal battle between Prasanna Sankar, a co-founder of a multi-billion dollar tech company, and his estranged wife, Dhivya, has escalated into a public spectacle involving accusations of harassment, extortion, and kidnapping. Sankar, who is the co-founder of Rippling, an HR-tech startup, has taken to social media to allege that he is being harassed by his wife and the Chennai police amidst a bitter divorce and custody battle for their son. He claims that the police are attempting to extort him for Rs 25 lakh in connection with a “kidnapping” complaint filed by his wife. Dhivya, on the other hand, has accused Sankar of being a “sex predator” and alleges that he forcibly took their son away from her. This complex and contentious case raises serious questions about the abuse of power, the weaponization of legal processes, and the challenges faced by individuals navigating high-stakes divorce proceedings, particularly when children are involved. The details emerging from both sides paint a picture of deep-seated animosity and a willingness to employ extreme measures in the pursuit of personal and financial gain. The involvement of law enforcement further complicates the matter, raising concerns about potential corruption and the fairness of the legal system. The public nature of the dispute, fueled by social media posts and media coverage, adds another layer of complexity, potentially influencing public opinion and prejudicing the outcome of the legal proceedings. The case highlights the importance of due process, the need for impartial investigations, and the protection of individual rights in the face of serious accusations. It also underscores the potential for technology and social media to be used as tools for both transparency and manipulation in legal disputes. The allegations made by both parties must be thoroughly investigated and adjudicated in a fair and impartial manner to ensure that justice is served and the well-being of the child is protected. The case serves as a cautionary tale about the devastating consequences of failed relationships and the importance of resolving disputes through peaceful and constructive means.
Sankar's accusations, laid out in a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), detail a harrowing experience of being “on the run” from Chennai law enforcement. He claims that his wife filed a false complaint alleging that he “kidnapped” their son, leading to the police illegally tracking his cell phone location, car, UPI transactions, and IP address without an FIR (First Information Report). He attributes the escalating conflict to his wife's alleged affair and their subsequent divorce proceedings. According to Sankar, the disagreement over the financial terms of the divorce settlement led his wife to file a series of false complaints against him, including allegations of assault, rape, and circulation of nude videos. He asserts that Singapore police investigated these allegations and found them to be baseless, clearing him of all charges. Further complicating the situation, Sankar claims that his wife “abducted” their nine-year-old son to the US, prompting him to file an international child abduction case. He states that the US court ruled in his favor, resulting in a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) between the two parties. The MoU allegedly stipulated that Sankar would pay his wife around Rs 9 crore and Rs 4.3 lakh per month, while sharing joint custody of their son. However, tensions reportedly resurfaced when his wife refused to comply with the MoU, particularly regarding the deposit of their child's passport in a shared locker. Sankar alleges that his wife demanded more money and threatened to file for divorce in the US again. This led to Sankar approaching the courts, insisting on shared custody only after the passport was secured. When his wife failed to attend court, he claims she confronted him at his hotel, attempting to lure their son into the lobby, which he prevented. Subsequently, she allegedly called the police and filed the kidnapping complaint that triggered the current crisis. Fearing wrongful arrest, Sankar claims he fled with his son, only to find the police relentlessly pursuing him, even visiting his mother's house. He also alleges that the police detained his friend, Gokul, who assisted in picking up the child, without a warrant, and threatened him to pressure Sankar into surrendering.
Adding another layer of complexity to the narrative, Sankar accuses the Chennai police of attempting to extort him for Rs 25 lakh in exchange for Gokul's release. He claims that the Assistant Commissioner (AC) and Sub-Inspector (SI) of the Thirumangalam police station are exploiting his success as a founder to extract money. Sankar's public accusations have drawn significant attention on social media, prompting a response from a top police official in Chennai, who has dismissed his allegations as “baseless.” However, the damage to the reputation of the Chennai police and the integrity of the legal system is already done. The public airing of these grievances raises serious questions about the transparency and accountability of law enforcement agencies. The allegations of extortion and harassment, if proven true, would represent a significant breach of public trust and a violation of the rule of law. It is imperative that an independent and impartial investigation be conducted to determine the veracity of Sankar's claims and to hold any wrongdoers accountable. The case also highlights the importance of protecting the rights of individuals who are accused of crimes, ensuring that they are afforded due process and are not subjected to undue pressure or coercion. The detention of Gokul without a warrant, as alleged by Sankar, is a clear violation of his fundamental rights and raises concerns about the potential for abuse of power by law enforcement officials.
In stark contrast to Sankar's narrative, Dhivya's account portrays him as a manipulative and abusive individual. According to local media reports, she has accused Sankar of “wrongdoing” and claims that he forcibly took their son away from her and never returned him. Dhivya asserts that she and her son are US citizens and that they returned to India earlier this month, only to have Sankar take their son away. She claims that he is preventing them from living peacefully. Further fueling the controversy, Dhivya has reportedly labeled Sankar a “sex predator,” alleging that he used to “secretly record women,” which led to his arrest in Singapore, although he was later released. These allegations, if true, would paint a disturbing picture of Sankar's character and raise serious concerns about his suitability as a parent. The accusation of secretly recording women is particularly damaging, as it suggests a pattern of exploitation and a disregard for the privacy and dignity of others. It is important to note that these are just allegations, and Sankar is presumed innocent until proven guilty. However, the gravity of the accusations warrants a thorough investigation and careful consideration by the courts. Dhivya has also reportedly accused Sankar of transferring their matrimonial assets to his father's name to evade taxes. She claims that Sankar's father then transferred these assets to his brother in Thailand. Additionally, she alleges that Sankar “threatened” her into signing documents that prevented her from reporting tax crimes in the US. These allegations, if substantiated, would expose Sankar to potential criminal charges and significant financial penalties. They also raise questions about his business ethics and his willingness to engage in illegal activities to protect his wealth. The complex web of accusations and counter-accusations underscores the challenges of resolving disputes involving high-net-worth individuals, where financial considerations often overshadow the well-being of the children involved.
The legal battle between Prasanna Sankar and Dhivya is a complex and multifaceted case with significant implications for both parties and for the legal system as a whole. The allegations of harassment, extortion, kidnapping, and abuse must be thoroughly investigated and adjudicated in a fair and impartial manner. The well-being of the child at the center of this dispute must be the paramount concern, and the courts must take all necessary steps to protect his physical and emotional safety. The case also highlights the importance of transparency and accountability in law enforcement, as well as the need for due process and the protection of individual rights. The public nature of the dispute, fueled by social media and media coverage, adds another layer of complexity, potentially influencing public opinion and prejudicing the outcome of the legal proceedings. It is imperative that the courts resist any external pressures and render a decision based solely on the evidence presented. The case serves as a cautionary tale about the devastating consequences of failed relationships and the importance of resolving disputes through peaceful and constructive means. It also underscores the potential for technology and social media to be used as tools for both transparency and manipulation in legal disputes. The outcome of this case will have far-reaching implications, not only for Sankar and Dhivya, but also for the legal system and the public's perception of justice. It is crucial that the courts ensure that justice is served and that the rights of all parties are protected. The case also serves as a reminder of the importance of seeking professional help when navigating complex legal disputes, particularly those involving divorce and child custody. Attorneys, mediators, and therapists can provide valuable guidance and support to help individuals navigate the emotional and legal challenges of separation and divorce. Ultimately, the goal should be to find a resolution that is fair, equitable, and in the best interests of all involved, especially the children.
Source: Chennai Techie Accuses Wife, Cops Of Harassment, She Calls Him 'Sex Predator'