For civilian nuclear safety governance, independent nuclear regulators are imperative to eliminate conflicts of interest and to prioritize safety over political and economic pressures.  It is important that national practices of nuclear regulatory authorities align with the best international practices. To understand the nuclear safety governance of South Asia, this study undertakes a comparative analysis of the nuclear regulatory frameworks of Pakistan and India by examining the Atomic Energy Regulatory Board (AERB) and the Pakistan Nuclear Regulatory Authority (PNRA) against the safety standards and guidelines of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The main argument of this research is that regulatory independence is essential for sustainable nuclear safety governance, and the absence of regulatory autonomy creates structural vulnerabilities that can affect long-term safety outcomes. In the context of Pakistan and India, it is significant because both states operate a civilian nuclear program in a shared geopolitical environment where regulatory failures carry transboundary consequences. The comparative analysis has been conducted across different dimensions such as regulatory independence, decision making and enforcement effectiveness, Integrated Regulatory Review Service (IRRS) implementation in both jurisdictions, and preparedness for emerging technological risks. For research methodology, the research adopts a qualitative approach to examine nuclear regulatory frameworks in Pakistan and India. The findings indicate that, as per IAEA safety standards, PNRA possesses a formally robust and independent institutional structure along with mature international engagement compared to AERB, which operates under a subordinated institutional architecture.