Come on...... building up a navy is a hugly capital intensive endevour and as such it is game of economics. With an economy that is 7-8 times larger and with growth rapidly outpacing Pakistan's, India and by extension IN has the clear lead that without monumantal changes to the current ecomimc situation vis a vis India and Pakistan (which short of an apocalypse are never to happen) can not change. We can see this when we look at the annual defence budgets of the two nations, if the IN's annual capital acquistions busdget is many times more than the entire annual defence budget of Pakistan why are we even talking of parity? It is unfair and offensive to by nations IMHO. I have said it before and will reiterate it again, just because India and Pakistan happen to be loacted in the same geographic location doesn't mean we should lump them together. We wouldn't compare the Belgium navy to the IN given that Belgium's annual defence budget is equal to if not slightly greater than Pakistan's. Taken in this context the PN is actually quite impressive in what it is and has available to it- not comparable with IN but still a pretty decent Navy.
And those saying the the nuclear weapon is an apt counter to IN are either incredibly stupid or incredibly ignorant- a nuke is not a weapon one should boast about nor claim to be an "equalizer" if ever one were to be used it would signal the end of not just the nation that used it but much of the world as we know it today so put away this ludicrous notion once and for all. Unless the Pakistani leadership are equally as stupid they will (hopefully) never use such a weapon unless Pakistan as a nation is at risk of imminent collapse at the hands of a foreign power.
The PN should focus on its immediate security challenges ie terrorism and piracy and have the IN's rise at the back of their minds as it is not an imminent threat to Pakistan. In a time of war all anyone should expect from the PN is to buy the leadership a few extra hours/days in which to find a political solution to hostilities and not in fact to counter or beat the IN- this is an impossibility. In a wartime situation IN supremacy/victory over PN is a given the only variable is how long it takes, as such the PN can try and eek out defeat for as long as possible and be content if it is able to last longer than 48-72 hours.
+to those comparing the PN to the ICG- I can see the logic behind this but it is not a wholly sensible point to argue as the ICG is not geared up to fight another navy, it is not trained to, the infrastructure wrt C&C is not in place to do so (on thier own and without coming under the umbrella of IN) and the ships are not equipped to do so. Yes many of the ships in the ICG are larger than most of the ships in the PN, they are lightly armed for their size (in naval terms) as their mandate requires. Now it can be said that provisions are in place for the ICG to fall under IN in times of war and to be given much heavier fire-power, the chances of ICG ever being used against the PN are unlikely, the ICG will most likely only be used as a rear-guard and be assigned to protect the Indian coast. One should compare like with like and comparing ICG with PN is unfair as is IN and PN given the IN is firmly set on becomg a true "blue-water" navy and the PN is set to remain a truly "green-water" one.
I have to say, though, it must be discouraging to be a PN officer/sailor and see the massive expansion of IN and all the state of the art kit the IN is getting that any professional naval officer/sailor would love to get their hands on.