Did Alexander the Great defeat Porus, or did the opposite happen?

These days I see so many online contents claiming that Porus actually defeated Alexander. And the narrative of Alexander being the winner was propagated by Greek historians.

The written sources of Alexander being the victor comes only from the Greeks. But history is not just about written records. Coins from Taxila of this era shows Alexander as the clear victor. Later, Porus was appointed as his vassal.

(Porus' elephant running away while being chased by Alexander. Indicating the outcome of the war)

Porus was one of the most difficult enemy encountered by Alexander. It was a costly, bloody battle for Alexander. But just because it was his last war doesn't mean he was defeated. His army was homesick and there was a mutiny. So, he was forced to go back. This was not a withdrawal. The areas he conquered were still part of his empire.

(Map of territories conquered by Alexander in India which includes Porus’ territory)

Another evidence of Alexander's victory is. In 303 BCE, when Chandragupta Maurya defeated Seleucus Nicator ( Alexander's successor), the Eastern province of Seleucid Empire, that is the area including the Punjab region where Porus’ kingdom existed was ceded to the Mauryan Empire. If Porus was the victor then why should Alexander's General give away this land to Chandragupta?

(Those same territories from the previous map being ceded to Chandragupta Maurya)

I can see that many nationalists are uncomfortable with Porus' defeat, and that is why they come up with fake counter narratives. There's nothing to be ashamed of it. Validating a historical event or figure solely on the basis of victory is a hyper masculine way of approaching history. History is how it has happened, you can't change the past. All you can do is, learn from them, so that you don't have to repeat those mistakes.