Explanation:

This question addresses a crucial aspect of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, specifically concerning the admissibility and consideration of confessions made by co-accused persons. The relevant provision is Section 30 of the Act. **Analysis of Options:** * **Option (1) Yes, statement of 'B' may be taken into consideration against 'A'.** This is the correct answer. Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, states: "When more persons than one are being jointly tried for the same offence, and a confession made by one of such persons affecting himself and some other of such persons is proved, the Court may take into consideration such confession as against such other person as well as against the person who makes such confession." In this scenario, 'A' and 'B' are being jointly tried for the murder of 'C' (the 'same offence'). 'B' has made a statement (which, if proved, amounts to a confession) implicating both himself ('I murdered C') and 'A' ('A and I murdered C'). Therefore, all the conditions of Section 30 are met. The court has the discretion to 'take into consideration' this confession not only against 'B' (the maker) but also against 'A' (the co-accused). It's important to note that a co-accused's confession is not substantive evidence upon which a conviction can solely be based, but it can be used to corroborate other evidence against the co-accused. * **Option (2) No, statement of 'B' against 'A' cannot be taken into consideration.** This option is incorrect because it directly contradicts the provision of Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. Section 30 specifically allows for such a confession to be taken into consideration, provided the conditions (joint trial, same offense, confession implicating both) are met. The statement, while not a full proof, is a piece of evidence that the court can weigh alongside other evidence. Therefore, a blanket exclusion is incorrect. * **Option (3) Can be taken into consideration partly.** This option is vague and potentially misleading. While the court may choose to give certain weight to different parts of a confession, the fundamental principle under Section 30 is that the *entire confession* (affecting both the maker and co-accused) is taken into consideration. The court cannot simply pick and choose parts to consider against the co-accused while ignoring others that might be exculpatory or not directly implicating. The confession must be taken as a whole. Therefore, this option is not precise enough and potentially incorrect in its implication. * **Option (4) All the above are incorrect propositions of Law.** This option is incorrect because option (1) correctly states the legal position as per Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act. Thus, under Section 30 of the Indian Evidence Act, when 'A' and 'B' are jointly tried for the murder of 'C', and 'B' confesses to the murder implicating 'A' as well, the court may take 'B's confession into consideration against 'A'.