What constitutes reckless wounding according to the Crimes Act?

Reckless wounding, as outlined in the Crimes Act, specifically refers to causing injury to another person without the intention to kill or inflict serious injury, but with a disregard for the potential consequences of one's actions. This means that the perpetrator acts recklessly, leading to someone else being injured, even if there is no outright intention to cause severe harm. It involves a level of awareness of the risk one is taking and a willingness to proceed regardless.

The context of the other options provides additional clarity. Injuring someone without any reason does not encompass the legal definition since reckless wounding pertains to the conscious disregard of risk, not an arbitrary action. Injuring someone with intent to scare suggests a motive that involves intent to cause fear, which does not meet the criteria for reckless wounding since motivation and intent are distinct considerations in the legal framework. Lastly, injuring someone in self-defense would not qualify as reckless wounding because self-defense is a justifiable action recognized under law when responding to an imminent threat, separating it from the concept of recklessness.

Thus, option C accurately captures the essence of reckless wounding under the Crimes Act.