Admissible Evidence from Accomplice

Yeh dono toh different cheez hai, kya? Our friend Rohan and I were discussing this. Here are our views:

I ( @Evidence_Guru ): Section 3 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 clearly states that statements of an accomplice are not relevant as proof against the accused. So, if the accused's friend is an accomplice in the crime, his statement against the accused is inadmissible in court. Rohan ko lagta hai ye wrong hai. But I'm saying, it's a strict rule, and we can't bend it.

Rohan: But arre, Evidence Guru, Section 3 itself says it's not applicable when the statement is relevant to prove the accomplice's existence or his liability for the act.