One cannot hold a company directly liable for any criminal act until one identifies the very ego and center of the personality of the company. This paper is, therefore, concerned with the examination of the provisions made under our laws and the laws of other jurisdictions together with case laws for easy identification of those organs of the company which control the affairs of the company. The author adopted historical, expository, analytical and comparative methods in conducting this research. Part of the findings of this paper is that the de facto control of the management of the affairs of a company resides with the board of directors while de jure control is with the general meeting. The paper, recommends that Sections 246 and 255 of CAMA be amended to accommodate the right caliber of men on the board.