Explanation:

- When ‘A’ states to a bystander that ‘B’ has assaulted him, this is an oral statement made shortly after the incident.

- Section 8 of the Indian Evidence Act deals with motive, preparation, and conduct, and includes statements that explain conduct under investigation.

- Such a spontaneous statement by A can actually be considered relevant under section 8, as it explains A’s conduct and is also part of the res gestae (things done, immediate facts) if made at or near the time of the occurrence.

- Therefore, it is not necessarily inadmissible—the law tends to treat such statements as admissible to explain actions or reactions immediately after the event.

- Option 3: Oral statement is too generic and does not reference legal relevance.

- Option 2: A statement under section 8 which is inadmissible is not accurate because these statements are generally admissible under section 8 if they explain relevant conduct.

- Option 1: A complaint under section 8 is not accurate because a complaint usually refers to a formal, often written, report to authorities.

- Option 4: None of the above does not apply since option 2 is close but not accurate, and option 3 is too broad.

Option 1: A complaint under section 8 (Correct Answer)

Such a statement is considered relevant under section 8 as conduct, but is not the same as a formal "complaint." Among the given options, the closest is that it's a statement under section 8 (relevant and admissible to explain conduct).