“I Gave Her a Porsche and a House…” — Aravind Reddy’s Defense Amid Harassment Allegations

Nov 16, 2025 · 7 views

Kannada businessman and producer Aravind Venkatesh Reddy has found himself embroiled in a serious controversy. He was recently arrested over allegations of stalking, harassment, and sexual misconduct made by Sandalwood actress Krishi Thapanda. But Reddy isn’t staying silent — he’s pushing back hard with a very public defense.

A Live-In Relationship and the Accusations

According to media reports, the police arrested Reddy following complaints from Thapanda that he had stalked her, shared morphed photos online, and sent threatening letters to her friends and even her landlord. NDTV+2The New Indian Express+2 Their relationship allegedly began after they met at an event abroad, and they entered into a live-in relationship. Asianet Suvarna News+2Asianet Newsable+2

Thapanda’s complaint paints a picture of intimidation and obsession — she claims Reddy tracked her movements, threatened her family, and forced her into maintaining the relationship. NDTV+2Asianet Suvarna News+2

Reddy’s Version: Gifts, Investments, and Betrayal

In his public statements to police and media, Reddy says he spent lavishly on Thapanda:

  • Porsche Gift: He claims to have given her a customized Porsche in her name. Asianet Suvarna News

  • Property Support: He says he helped her with a “site” — land or real estate — by registering an agreement in her name. Asianet Suvarna News+1

  • Financial Backing: According to him, he funded her trips — to places like Dubai and Tanzania — because they were “partners.” Asianet Suvarna News

He insists, now that she’s accusing him, that these gifts and investments show how serious he was about the relationship.

The Fallout

Reddy doesn’t just deny wrongdoing; he accuses Thapanda of making baseless allegations now. He says that after giving her the car, helping her financially, and planning for marriage, she has turned against him. Asianet Suvarna News+1

He also says that though a “site” was registered in her name, she never followed through, and now she is making “unnecessary accusations.” Public TV Kannada

During his arrest, and later when granted bail, Reddy has stated his willingness to “produce any records” to prove his claims. Asianet Suvarna News

The Actress’s Response

Thapanda, on her part, has rejected some of Reddy’s claims. For example, she has clarified that she did not spend “three crores” as he alleged. Asianet Suvarna News She also said that her earnings are legitimate and that she has never asked for such huge sums.

Moreover, her recent Instagram story — which resurfaced after Reddy got bail — suggests that she feels deeply wronged and cornered by the court of public opinion. Asianet Suvarna News She accused some people of spreading “lies and hate” about her, and said she’s firm about her truth and willing to fight for it. Asianet Suvarna News

Bigger Questions & What Lies Ahead

This case raises several thorny questions:

  1. Power dynamics: Is this a story of financial leverage being misused in a relationship?

  2. Evidence and intent: Who really owns the car and the property now? Are there formal documents backing Reddy’s claims?

  3. Allegations vs Defense: Are Thapanda’s accusations credible, or is this a counterattack by Reddy to discredit her?

  4. Legal implications: With Reddy’s arrest and bail, how will the investigation proceed? Will the courts examine the financial transaction trail?

Final Thoughts

This is more than just a high-profile celebrity scandal. On one level, it’s about allegations of harassment, abuse, and stalking — deeply serious issues in any relationship. On another, it's a very public fight over gifts, money, and reputation.

Aravind Reddy’s defense — that he “gave her everything” and is now being falsely accused — complicates the narrative. But whether his version holds up depends on documentation, testimony, and the legal process. For Krishi Thapanda, the challenge is proving what she claims happened — and for Reddy, to back his claims with proof.

As this case unfolds, it could have broader implications for how such personal disputes are perceived in public, especially when financial power and celebrity are involved