The appellant was charged before the Federal High Court on a one count charge of dealing in 10kg of cannabis sativa (otherwise known as Indian Hemp), a drug similar to cocaine, heroin, LSD etc without lawful authority thereby committing an offence contrary to and punishable under Section 11(c) of the National Drug Law Enforcement Agency, Cap. N30 LFN. 2004.

It was the appellant's contention that the only court that has jurisdiction to entertain the charge is the Magistrate's Court by virtue of Section. 8(1) of the Indian Hemp Act.

It appears from Section 3(2) of the Indian Hemp Act that any person charged with an offence of either importing Indian Hemp or dealing in Indian Hemp by knowingly "selling any Indian Hemp" shall "be tried summarily by a single Judge of the High Court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed". The offence of dealing in or importing Indian Hemp under Section 3(2) of the Indian Hemp Act is clearly, by dint of Section 8(1) of the Act, not within the jurisdiction vested in the Magistrate's Court The offences, within, the jurisdiction of the Magistrate's court are those having to do with possession, selling and smoking, including being in possession of "any pipe or other utensil for use in connection with the smoking of Indian Hemp" or permitting, by the occupier, the use of any premises for the purpose of selling, preparing and/or the smoking of Indian Hemp. The offences under Sections 4 -7 of the Indian Hemp Act are those in respect of which the Act vests jurisdiction in the Magistrate's courts to entertain. The jurisdiction is not stated expressly to be exclusive to the magistrate's court. Thus, as what is not expressly prohibited is implicitly permitted; the jurisdiction of the High Court having not been expressly prohibited is by implication permitted.