The short answer
No. The ends justify the means is not in his work in any language. The proverb's family is older and later than he is: Ovid's exitus acta probat, the outcome approves the deeds, spoken by an abandoned woman who does not mean it kindly; and an English comic poem by Matthew Prior of about 1700: The End must justifie the Means.
The Prince, chapter 18
The nearest he comes is two sentences, a page after the lion and the fox. The actions of all men, and especially of princes, are judged by the result, where there is no other judge to whom to appeal. So a prince should look to keeping his state, and the means which he employs for this will always be accounted honorable, and will be praised by everybody.
Look at the verbs. The actions are judged. The means will be accounted honourable. None of them says what the means are; each says what will be said of them, and by whom: the crowd, which wants the result. The proverb says the end makes the deed good. He says the crowd, which looks at results, will forgive it.
The Discourses, on Romulus
In the Discourses he defends Romulus, who killed his brother: a wise mind will not censure extraordinary means used to found a state, and when the act accuses him, the result should excuse him.
But count what stands around the sentence. The founder's object must be the public good, not his own. He must put his country before his successors and hand power to nobody. The result must be good. And he must be one man founding a state where there was none.
The hardest thing he wrote
Once, he drops the conditions himself. When a Roman army is trapped and can save itself only by surrendering, he writes that where the very safety of the country depends on it, no considerations of justice or injustice, humanity or cruelty, nor of glory or of shame, should be allowed to prevail. It is fenced to a republic's survival, and the shameful thing counselled is a surrender. Take the country's survival away and you have the proverb.