If you look at the image at the lower left, under the hand holding the torch, you will see four Arabic numerals that look like 1352 to me. The best resource on the numerals and the coin is the Krause STANDARD CATALOG OF WORLD COINS. You can buy the three volume set new for about $120 or you can find one old edition with about the same information for $5 or $10 at used book store or library sale. As for the origin? Perhaps you will find it listed under Nepal... Bhutan... somewhere in the Himilayas.
The coin is a 1/40 Riyal or 1 Buqsha from Yemen Arab Republic. Dated AH1382 (Muslim calendar) which equals 1962. It's in my 2004 Krause on p2190-2191 and lists for .75c in VF and 1.00 in XF.
Very possibly, since Krause notes that there are "varieties of date size and design" on Y#22, but I am not completely convinced. The design in the center of the reverse doesn't seem to match the picture in Krause, and it should be dated on both sides, but I don't really see a reverse date. More precisely, since the lunar year is shorter than the solar year, on the western calendar AH1382 began on June 4, 1962 and ended on May 25, 1963. Not surprisingly, Y#22 is on a different page in the 2005 volume, which is why it is always best to include the catalog number in a coin description, since the viewer might have any one of 32 different editions for the current period, and one of 2-4 editions for an earlier century. Me too. Another reason for being unsure about the ID. The character "5" is like an incomplete small circle, and the character "8" is like a "^". This coin doesn't seem to have enough wear to explain the shape of the third digit if it was originally an "8". The coin did not come from any of the other three Yemens, but there are a lot of countries using Arabic characters. What is the actual size? The brass or bronze Yemen Arab Republic Buqsha is approximately 27mm across. Krause doesn't give the weights for either metal composition.
http://www.zeno.ru/showphoto.php?photo=3644&password=&sort=1&cat=617&page=1 heres another while were at it
