I believe it depends on the interpretation of the act. The winners write history and justify the means used to achieve a successful end.
For example, if a group of thieves pulls off a successful diamond heist and they walk away with 100 million dollars, move to Brazil, and live in the sun for the rest of their lives, then yes, to them, the ends justifies the means. To them, the fact that they may have cost many other people a livelihood has nothing to do with it.
However, if they same group gets caught, then those who caught them will say that end itself and the means employed during the robbery were wrong.
Another example: A guy sets up a coworker, planting false, damning documents in the coworker's desk, then notifies the boss of the documents. Coworker gets fired and the guy gets the coworker's higher-paying job. When the guy's family is able to move from their cramped apartment to a bigger home and the guy is able to put away money into his children's college funds, then, for him, the ends definitely justified the means.