Evidence of fact and proof of fact difference?

Yes lot of defference .I will make it more simple. Facts are door to truth. Mere fact is not truth. And how it can be twisted by clever cross examination , please see from following examples.

That is why law is written in books and every body knows it but results are defferent with defferent persons.

Few examples of clever cross examination.

Now see the two sentences below :-

God  is no where            God  is now here

No change in a single word still just by rearranging there is whole lot of deference.

So I will ask a loaded question – this is just example , there will be similar questions depending upon the case for which lot of hard work has to be done.

QUESTION= Have you stopped beating your wife.

Any answer will trap him, since before he understands the question the reply will be yes or no. Yes means he has admitted that he was beating his wife earlier. No means he is beating his wife.

And particularly for NI 138 cases if the accused has not replied the notice after bounce of cheque it is very easy and simple to prove that no notice was received which will demolish the foundation of the case. 

Great GSDN.

without fact there can be no evidence and without evidence there can be no fact.

Please appreciate the point that facts can be twiested and that is why there are two sides.

 if postal address of accused is correct and he doesn't recieve notice personally then it attracts NI 138? How to prove that accused didn't recieve Notice?