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- 23rd 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.