IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 494 of 2009 Date of Decision 30th December, 2011 ________________________________________________________ State of Himachal Pradesh. ….Appellant Versus Meena Sen, wife of Shri Dhan Bahadur, resident of Phursh Khali, Ward No. 6, P.S. Dang, District Dang, Ravti Anchal (Nepal). …..Respondent Criminal Appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. ________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.B. Misra, J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 ________________________________________________________ For the Appellant: Mr. R.K. Sharma, Sr. Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Additional Advocate General For the Respondent: None. __________________________________________________________________ R.B. Misra, J.(oral) This appeal was admitted on 6.10.2009. Respondent is native of Nepal. Bailable warrant of arrest was issued against the respondent and it was sent to Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, for execution as the respondent is stated to 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 have left country for her native country Nepal. Warrant has been received back unexecuted with a letter from Under Secretary, Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, with the report that the warrant was sent to Indian Embassy at Kathmandu and the Embassy has returned the same with a report that in the past when warrants, summons, notices etc. were sent to the Government of Nepal for service/execution, the same were received back, with the remarks that warrants, summons, notices received from other countries cannot be served/executed in Nepal, as per the existing law of Nepal. 2. By following the precedent of Hon’ble Supreme in State of H.P. vs. Satish Kumar in Criminal Appeal No. 917 of 1997 decided on 31st August, 2001, we dismiss this appeal for want of prosecution, because no useful purpose will be served by keeping it pending. However, liberty is reserved to the State to get the appeal revived if it happens to secure the presence of respondent. (R.B. Misra), Judge December 30, 2011 (Dev Darshan Sud) (ms) Judge.