The bitter and highly publicized custody battle between Silicon Valley entrepreneur Prasanna Sankar, the co-founder of HR tech unicorn Rippling, and his estranged wife Dhivya Sashidhar has escalated dramatically, with new explosive allegations emerging from both parties. What initially began as a personal custody dispute has now spilled into the public domain, with accusations of domestic abuse, sexual coercion, financial manipulation, and international legal warfare taking center stage in media headlines and online discussions.
The latest development comes from Dhivya’s tell-all interview with The San Francisco Standard, a major U.S.-based outlet that published a lengthy report outlining her version of events, which starkly contrasts Prasanna’s earlier narrative. Dhivya accuses Prasanna of being a sexual predator, stating that he coerced her into non-consensual sexual acts, even during periods of postpartum pain and trauma. In chilling detail, she alleged that Prasanna would pressure her into sex, saying it was his "primal need," and that her refusal would lead him to seek it elsewhere.
“He would literally, like, tell me that, you know, ‘If you don’t do it, then I want to go outside and get it,’” Dhivya said, adding that she often felt she had no agency over her own body. She also claimed he tried to normalize the use of prostitutes in their marriage and that he pushed for an open relationship, all under the guise of modernity and mutual understanding, while disregarding her own discomfort and boundaries.
One of the most shocking allegations includes the claim that Prasanna installed hidden cameras throughout their residence in Singapore, including their young son’s bathroom, which Dhivya said made her feel “like she was living under surveillance.” The San Francisco Standard report backs these claims with court documents, emails, photographs, and a collection of other legal and digital records, giving Dhivya’s account a foundation of documentation that is difficult to ignore.
Prasanna, for his part, has refuted these allegations, saying that the Standard “ignored all [his] responses” and chose to publish a one-sided story. He called the accusations “random” and claimed they were gaining “almost no viewership,” although the traction the story is receiving online suggests otherwise. He also indicated he would issue a full response on X (formerly Twitter) if the situation continued to escalate, where he previously accused Dhivya of kidnapping their child and fleeing from India to the U.S. in violation of custody agreements.
Dhivya has rebutted that narrative as well, saying she fled India out of fear for her safety and her son’s well-being, and that she was granted both an emergency passport and a restraining order upon arriving in the U.S. She insists that her departure was not a kidnapping but an act of desperation, undertaken only after she had exhausted all other options.
Another layer of the story involves allegations of financial wrongdoing. Dhivya claims that Prasanna intentionally moved across multiple jurisdictions — including Singapore, India, and the United States — to dodge taxes and hide marital assets. She alleges that he even admitted in legal proceedings that avoiding U.S. income tax and exit tax was a significant factor in their relocations. These accusations could have serious legal implications in family courts and financial investigations, particularly if regulatory bodies decide to probe deeper.
Adding to the complexity of this saga is the fact that Prasanna is a high-profile figure in the tech world, and these revelations have ignited heated debates online about power dynamics in tech marriages, domestic abuse, legal accountability, and media bias. Some have accused media outlets of being too quick to platform one side, while others are applauding Dhivya for her courage to speak up despite the personal and social costs.
As the legal battle continues across international borders, with custody, reputation, and possibly criminal liability hanging in the balance, this story is far from over. Both sides have lawyered up and are preparing for an intense courtroom showdown that could set precedents in cases involving cross-border custody, abuse allegations in high-net-worth households, and the interplay of personal trauma and public perception in the age of social media.
The public and legal scrutiny is only expected to grow in the coming weeks, especially if Prasanna follows through on his promise to release a comprehensive counter-narrative. For now, both parties remain entrenched in a conflict that is not just about custody but about identity, truth, justice, and the emotional wreckage left behind when love turns into litigation.
