Frankly a country made up of two large population lobes completely separated by 3000 kilometers of relatively hostile neighbor (or twice that in ocean) is bound to break up eventually. It just logistically can't work out very well, and culturally they are bound to start going their separate ways. I'm unaware of any country like that in history that lasted for a decent length of time. (OK...there was Burgandy, but the distances were shorter, it never really achieved the "kingdom-hood" it was shooting for, and it was felt it couldn't without joining up its territory somehow).
So really what specifically they picked to fall out over I don't think matters much in the long run.
Also, it should be noted that the language issue in India wasn't as simple and peaceful as you're making out either. English is an alternative "official language" there, and individual states can make their own. Additionally India has had the advantage of being able to march their army into any complaining provinces to restore order. From wikipedia:
The Indian constitution, in 1950, declared Hindi in Devanagari script
to be the official language of the union. Unless Parliament decided
otherwise, the use of English for official purposes was to cease 15
years after the constitution came into effect, i.e., on 26 January
1965. The prospect of the changeover, however, led to much alarm in the non Hindi-speaking areas of India, especially
Dravidian-speaking states whose languages were not related to Hindi at
all. As a result, Parliament enacted the Official Languages Act,
1963, which provided for the continued use of
English for official purposes along with Hindi, even after 1965.
In late 1964, an attempt was made to expressly provide for an end to
the use of English, but it was met with protests from states such as
Tamil Nadu, West Bengal, Karnataka, Pondicherry and Andhra Pradesh.
Some of these protests also turned violent. As a result, the
proposal was dropped, ...