Application under s.340 crpc

Blank cheque, security cheque misused cheques or stolen cheque theory have not been accepted by courts unless you can prove that there was no legal liability with credible evidence.

Or by expert cross your advocate should be able to demolish or create doubts about the story of the complainant that there was any legal dues or legal liability.

Supreme court has said that=

The presumption  under  Section  139  of  the  Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, includes the presumption of  the  existence  at  a  legally  enforceable  debt  or liability.    That  presumption  is  required  to  be honoured,  and  if  it  is  not  so  done,  the  entire basis  of  making  these  provisions  will  be  lost. 

.     on-       23^rd  JULY 2013.

Again the SC has said that=

three-Judge Bench of this Court ( SUPREME COURT ) in  has approved the above decision and held that failure of the drawer of the cheque to put up a probable defence for rebutting the presumption that arises under Section 139  would justify conviction even when the appellant drawer may have alleged that the cheque in question had been lost and was being misused by the  complainant.

So even at this late stage you should find expert legal aid at court room level from advocates who have contested the cheque bounce cases with results  so that you come out of your problems.

You can appraoch the dist., courty

False evidence perjury applications are entertained after final outcome and not at intermediate stages.

And the cheque case is a summons case which has a short procedure so even perjury matter is continued it will take long time for out come . And till now there is no known case of any result for such cases.

So better put your energies for contesting the case for which still there will be scope and avoid getting trapped.